Charles August Schlund, III
8520 N. 54th Drive
Glendale, AZ 85302
(602) 670-2017
Plaintiff in Pro Per
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
CHARLES AUGUST SCHLUND, III
Plaintiff,
vs.
GEORGE W. BUSH, an individual, et al.,
Defendants.
NOTICE AND MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER DATED NOVEMBER 21, 2005; AND CONTINUING
OBJECTION TO ORDER.
CIV 03-1590-PHX VAM
(Honorable Virginia A. Mathis)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Charles A. Schlund, III ("Plaintiff Schlund") hereby files his Motion for Reconsideration of the Court's order dated
November 21, 2005 and request the judgment entered thereon be vacated, and this also be considered a continuing
objection to the purported findings of fact and conclusions of law set forth in said order and judgment. Plaintiff
Schlund requests reconsideration of the above entitled order and judgment thereon for the following reasons.
1. The opinion's factual, legal, and procedural history is flawed. The court has added facts in its findings of
facts which never existed. The court has applied law based on the fabricated facts, which does not apply to this
case. The court has misunderstood and exaggerated the factual basis of Plaintiff's Complaint and has ignored a
history of factually presented torture of Plaintiff and perpetual invasion of his privacy, which has been admitted by
the Defendant in its Motion to Dismiss. The court granted Defendant's Motion to Dismiss on a legal basis which has
no factual support. The court gave no consideration whatsoever to the specific or ultimate facts set forth in
Plaintiff's clear, First Amended Complaint. The court has illegally profiled the nature and content of Plaintiff's lawsuit
and has made a decision based on such irregularities in order to protect the government who has engaged in
deprivation of Plaintiff Schlund's civil rights, torture, and perpetual invasion of privacy, with no showing of probable
cause.
The court has not applied common sense to its determination of the factual content and basis of Plaintiff's First
Amended Complaint. The court has acted unfair. The court has acted unobjectively. The court has acted without
impartiality. The court has ignored all of the substantiated factual basis specifically pled in the First Amended
Complaint, knowing there has not been a shred of evidence supported to controvert it by the Defendant. The court
has utterly failed to follow stare decisis case precedent mandated by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, other
circuits, and the United States Supreme Court. The court has intentionally ignored an entire body of law presented
to it supporting torture does exist, which includes the United States.
2. The court has incorrectly applied the Doran holding to Plaintiff's factual platform as set forth in his First
Amended Complaint. The court has intentionally and prematurely cut off Plaintiff's right to a jury trial on the merits
guaranteed by the United States Constitution. The court has intentionally violated Plaintiff's due process and equal
protection rights guaranteed under the United States Constitution. The court has ignored a controlling body of law
cited by Plaintiff, established by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal and the United States Supreme Court in a manner
to intentionally and effectively cut off Plaintiff's rights to pursue his matter in the United States District Court,
further violating his rights under the United States Constitution to redress the government in the judicial form.
3. The court has engaged in witness tampering by sending the United States marshals to Plaintiff Schlund's
residence to speak to his children concerning Plaintiff's state of mind, knowing Plaintiff Schlund is directly a
political witness against the Defendant in this action. The use of the United States Marshall in this manner serves no
other purpose than to create a veiled threat to Plaintiff Schlund as a political witness against said Defendant. There
is not a single fact which would justify the United States Marshall being used as a tool by the court other than an
attempt to create a veil threat due to its dislike of the nature and content of Plaintiff's protected and free speech of
the truth set forth in his Complaint, First Amended Complaint, and all pleadings filed before this court under penalty
of perjury by Plaintiff Schlund.
4. This court has intentionally shut its eyes, ignored and has ratified Defendant's conduct of torturing and
perpetually invading the privacy of Plaintiff Schlund, violating every federal law concerning torture and the
Convention Against Torture Act and the Deprivation of Civil Rights Act, including but not limited to the recently
established Anti-torture Act which will, no doubt, be passed by the Legislature, fully acknowledging a need for
federal law to prohibit torture by the United States government. The court has intentionally ignored, procedurally
thwarted, and terminated Plaintiff Schlund's colorable and actionable claims for his injuries and damages as set forth
in detail in his Complaint and First Amended Complaint as a result of the acts and conduct of Defendant, using
activities clearly defined as torture, causing extreme emotional distress and violation of Plaintiff Schlund's rights to
privacy and other due process and equal protection rights, flatly ignoring an entire body of case precedent which
compels the court to follow it as a matter of fundamental fairness.
5. This court has set forth bizarre assertions that are nonfactual in basis and never raised by Plaintiff
Schlund but raised by Defendant in a desperate act to encourage the court to bite the hook of deceit and
procedurally allow the Defendant to get off the hook of liability. In short, the court has placed the Defendant above
the law, contrary to all controlling United States Supreme Court law to the contrary. The court's appearance of
judicial impropriety, as herein and above stated, demonstrate a clear radical indifference to over 200 years of federal
law and judicial law interpreting federal law that simply states nobody is above the law, especially when they're
engaged in witness tampering, torture, and the perpetual placing of an individual under surveillance, in violation of
the laws which prohibit such conduct and allow for redress in the judicial system to remedy the wrong. Plaintiff
Schlund incorporates the Points and Authorities set forth and filed in support of his Motion for Injunctive Relief and
his Verified Complaint as though set forth verbatim in the interests of judicial economy, along with his First Amended
Complaint.
6. The court has intentionally rejected its objection to use its discretion to hire special experts to help it
understand the nature of the wireless telemetry and electronic product(s) used to violate Plaintiff Schlund's rights
through perpetual surveillance, which is the direct cause of his injury and damages relating to said torture, perpetual
invasion of his privacy, tampering with his witnesses and him, and causing extreme emotional distress, all actionable
under the law when fairly applied, allowing for the recovery of damages against said Defendant. The court has
intentionally ignored or intentionally devalued each and every of the specific facts alleged by Plaintiff under penalty
of perjury in his Complaint, First Amended Complaint, Motion for Injunctive Relief, and other pleadings filed under
penalty of perjury in support of his action. The court has intentionally ignored or grossly misunderstood the factual
content alleged in the aforesaid pleadings and intentionally and systematically rendered each of the appropriate
motions, well supported in fact and law, as "moot."
The court has further intentionally erred or incompetent erred by failing to issue specific findings of fact and
conclusions of law as continuously and perpetually requested by Plaintiff on said motions for purposes of clarity of
the record for review. These acts by the court have further undermined the interests of judicial integrity by
intentionally or incompetently erring to such degree, preventing a record being built adequate enough for adequate
and proper review by the Appellate Court, violating Plaintiff Schlund's due process and equal protection rights
under the United States Constitution. The court intentionally or incompetently erred, as there is not a single bit of
testimony or other factual evidence contrary to any of the specific testimony asserted under penalty of perjury by
Plaintiff Schlund to justify the court's incongruent decisions. The court has intentionally or incompetently erred by
flatly rejecting each and every bit of the factual content of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint and appropriately filed
motions for injunction relief on the issues of torture, perpetual invasion of privacy through wireless telemetry,
witness tampering, and other activities so set forth therein.
7. If Magistrate Mathis upholds her ruling in this case, she will be responsible for the deaths of thousands of
innocent American citizens, including men, women, and even children who will die as a result of this weapon system
which is designed around a monitoring device intended to be used secretly and unchecked against the American
people in violation of all laws and the American Constitution. Thousands of children's lives will be destroyed by the
government targeting and disabling the children's parents. The cost to the American economy will be in the
hundreds of billions of dollars for medical bills; lost work; unemployment insurance; law enforcement and court
costs; lost taxes, including Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid payments; welfare; disability payments; and
insurance, as well as many other costs caused as a direct result of the improper and illegal use of these devices
against the American people under the cover and color of law and the protection of the courts.
Thousands of senseless crimes will happen that would have never happened without the use of these devices to
secretly torture American citizens under the protection of the law and courts in violation of the American
Constitution and the laws of the United States.
Magistrate Mathis should allow Plaintiff Schlund to prove this in court and allow the lawsuit to go forward, resulting
in stopping these crimes by the government against innocent American citizens and by establishing published case
law which can be used to guarantee the American people their Constitutional rights are protected by the courts, no
matter who the violators of these rights are or what public office they hold. There is no good faith in these
investigations; there is only corruption, torture, and murder under the cover and color of law. Thousands of
witnesses can be called to prove that this is, in fact, a weapon system disguised by a monitoring device incorporated
into a device for torture so it can be used under the cover and color of law in investigations which are seldom
justifiable or real.
For Magistrate Mathis to allow this to continue based on delusions and a ruling which can only be called bizarre
would amount to mass murder by Magistrate Mathis of men, women and children. Plaintiff Schlund can and will
prove this is the truth and it is completely, undeniably, and totally provable in a trial.
Magistrate Mathis should fully understand that she has no friends in law enforcement in her ruling of November 21,
2005. Law enforcement stands with Plaintiff Schlund, and Plaintiff Schlund is protected by large numbers of law
enforcement officers from many agencies. The heads of the federal agencies and the Justice Department are
appointed by George W. Bush and represent him. The honest and non-corrupt agents stand behind Plaintiff
Schlund and have stood in lines to stand behind Plaintiff Schlund showing their support. Magistrate Mathis has
placed these honest and courageous agents and police lives in jeopardy, as she has placed Plaintiff Schlund's life in
jeopardy in her protection of drug dealers and murderers who work under the cover of law.
The only support Magistrate Mathis has is from corrupt judges and corrupt law enforcement involved in the drug
trade and other corrupt public officials involved the cover up of the fixing of the Presidential Elections of the United
States. The result is that Magistrate Mathis will be equally responsible for the framing of innocent people, fixing of
trials with the use of so called monitoring devices that are used for torture under corrupt police and agents authority
in investigations resulting in large numbers of murders, assassinations, rapes, TORTURE, accidents, suicides and the
destroying of many thousands of innocent American citizens' lives in fabricated investigations using this weapons
system that Magistrate Mathis refuses to allow witnesses to testify about with regard to how they have been tortured
by the American government.
Plaintiff Schlund has already proved in trial that the government is insane with paranoia and corruption in the cover
up of the knowledge and information Plaintiff Schlund has, including Plaintiff Schlund's reading of all the
government files on the plans and use of these devices for torture under the cover of law. Plaintiff Schlund has
already been tried in a federal trial in the cover up of this information, resulting in Plaintiff's acquittal. When Plaintiff
Schlund was leaving the federal trial after his acquittal, the honorable and honest Judge was standing behind his
desk and screaming at the top of his lungs, demanding the arrest of the police and agents involved in the framing of
Plaintiff Schlund and demanding that they be arrested and prosecuted for perjury and yelling at the top of his lungs
that no one commits perjury in his court room like the government had done in Plaintiff Schlund's trial. The framing
of Plaintiff and the perjury before the court continues and will continue until Plaintiff's death as a result of the
torture from the implants. The court must understand that there are trillions of dollars at stake, and unimaginable
power. Only an insane person would believe they allow free elections to decide who will run the most powerful
country on earth with the largest expenditures of money on earth without covertly trying to decide the outcome of
the elections.
The government will plant new shipments of drugs every time the court rules and the government will continue to pay
its people in the government's drug cartels to make conversations about Plaintiff Schlund. The government will
continue to alter Phone Records, Bank Records, Ground Positioning Satellites Records and any other record that
benefits the corruption in the government in this fabricated investigation. The government will always plant weapons
and money to show Plaintiff is involved in drugs when Plaintiff has no involvement in drugs of any kind. The
government will plant Plaintiff's finger prints on drugs and guns and other evidence. This is easily done after the
government made latex copies of Plaintiff's fingerprints after the government gassed Plaintiff during his sleep. The
government can make electronic conversations pretending to be Plaintiff Schlund and record these conversations at
well in the framing of Plaintiff and the government can even make movies or photos of Plaintiff as needed in the
framing of Plaintiff. The government in its paranoia has no other alterative to protect its self from the crimes it has
committed against Plaintiff Schlund and the American people. The government will continue to tell the court that
Plaintiff is a drug dealer, murderer and thief and is dishonest and crazy.
None of this will ever be true and everything will always be planted as it always has been as Plaintiff has already
proved in trial and if necessary will prove again. The government will always torture Plaintiff to close to death trying
to exchange a false conversation in exchange for relief from the torture of Plaintiff by the government. Set ups to
make Plaintiff look guilty of some crime will be done as often as possible and everyone around Plaintiff will always be
offered drugs trying to get these people to do drugs so Plaintiff can be targeted. Everywhere Plaintiff goes will be
bugged and monitored as it has been done since Plaintiff refused to work for the DEA as a DEA agent running drugs
and doing political assassinations in 1977 after reading the Don Bolles Papers (Government files).
Every time Plaintiff goes fishing or visits family or friend's drugs will be planted in Plaintiff's vehicle or shipped to
make the drugs look like they belong to Plaintiff Schlund, none of this will ever be real and Plaintiff Schlund will
never have any involvement in drugs or any other crime. If the government can murder someone and make it look like
Plaintiff did the murder then the government will murder them. Trillions of dollars are at stake and unimaginable
power in the cover up of the information Plaintiff Schlund has and can prove in a trial.
Only the most Paranoid delusional judge could believe that Plaintiff after being under constant surveillance for 28
years is really a criminal. Plaintiff has not even been arrested for J walking and never will be. The intent of the
government is to get Plaintiff in a position to plant drugs and then assassinate Plaintiff Schlund and use a throw
down weapon as the government's evidence that Plaintiff was guilty. To stop this armies of good honest police and
federal agents have foiled every attempt by the corrupt and dishonest agents and police hunting and torturing
Plaintiff costing the American People hundreds of millions of dollars. Any Judge or Magistrate that continues to
allow this is mad and insane and is a coward and guilty of treason against the American Constitution and the
American people. No judge or Magistrate is crazy enough to allow an arrest of Plaintiff Schlund knowing Plaintiff can
prove mass murder and treason against the highest ranking officials of the American Government.
There is no question if Magistrate Mathis is honest or corrupt. Magistrate Mathis rulings have been Bazaar but that is
expectable. The corrupt government agents are so paranoid of Magistrate Mathis that they have planted new
shipments of drugs and have used dramatically increased torture and sleep deprivation trying to stop this motion
and the appeal to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The paranoia of the corrupt government agents and judges has
fully proved that Magistrate Mathis is NOT corrupt. This does not mean she is not a fool, it only means she is an
honest Magistrate. She was picked as a political appointee most likely because her beliefs would stop her from
becoming a threat to those in power. It still remains to be proven if Magistrate Mathis is a fool or will involve herself
in mass murder. The government fully knows that I will win in a trial and that the government has no chance of
prosecuting me successfully. This is all that has stopped my arrest as the government threatens all known witnesses
and monitors everyone around Plaintiff and everywhere Plaintiff goes. The only chance the government has is to get
Magistrate Mathis to dismiss the case prematurely while adding in Mind Control to make the ruling look honest and
fair when it is really Obstruction of Justice and unfair and unjust. Plaintiff believes the ruling is based on the
government claiming Plaintiff is a drug dealer. Let me remind Magistrate Mathis that even Drug Dealers have
constitutionally protected rights and the damages for the use of torture are exactly the same as for innocent people
like Plaintiff Schlund.
The government will always pretend that Plaintiff Schlund will be arrested any day with there never being any chance
of an arrest. This is only a political investigation designed to authorize the use of torture which is totally provable in
a trial or hearing. The investigation is the authorization to make latex copies of Plaintiff finger prints and to take hair
and other DNA evidence to plant as needed in the framing of Plaintiff Schlund after gassing Plaintiff during his
sleep. The investigation is the authorization to hunt Plaintiff Schlund under the cover and color of law until some
evidence can be obtained that can be used against Plaintiff Schlund in a false light under perjury. The investigation
authorizes the government to enter Plaintiff's property and places Plaintiff goes and plant what is needed and
remove what ever the government needs to plant in other places to make Plaintiff appear to be guilty of some crime.
The investigation authorizes the government's access to Plaintiff Schlund's body which is required to torture
Plaintiff Schlund with so called bugging devices which were really designed to be used for torture and the murder of
political and economic threats. The courts disbelief is delusional and surreal.
The government daily has tried to force Plaintiff into an accident using torture as he drives his large heavy work truck
to and from jobs and home. Hundreds of Thousands of times the government has made plaintiff scream in pain and
has even knocked plaintiff out as he drove trying to assassinate Plaintiff and/or kill innocent people to drive Plaintiff
out of business and attack Plaintiff to protect the corruption in the government. These terrorist attacks against
Plaintiff will in time result in an accident that injures or kills some innocent people or Plaintiff. Magistrate Mathis
ruling dismissing this case and allowing the government to continue its use of torture as Plaintiff drives will in time
result in this accident at some time in the future. This will be a crime by Magistrate Mathis and will be deliberate and
intentional. This motion is absolute proof that the court fully knew what they were doing and what would happen.
Plaintiff Schlund will do everything in his power to stop such an accident and will do everything possible to avoid
such an accident. If the government did not knock out Plaintiff's helper every time he got into the truck Plaintiff
Schlund would have him drive but that would insure an accident. The government will inject with implants anyone
that Plaintiff Schlund hires to work for him or install electronic devices in their seat or clothing to disable them and
torture them to try to cause an accident to kill or injure innocent people or Plaintiff Schlund. Plaintiff Schlund has
complained to the courts and the government about this for many years with the government just laughing at
Plaintiff Schlund and planting more drugs to frame Plaintiff as the government try's to justify their terrorist actions.
Plaintiff Schlund's blood pressure is kept between about 170 and 220 most of the time with Plaintiff's blood pressure
sometimes skyrocketing too much higher levels. Plaintiff is on maximum doses of blood control medication and
takes his medication every day. The high blood pressure is caused from the electronic implants and the use of
constant torture and sleep deprivation. Plaintiff never had high blood pressure until the torture began after his
injection with the implants. The blood pressure falls and rises with the degree of the torture. The high blood pressure
is destroying Plaintiff's organs and is killing Plaintiff and this can easily be proven that the implants are responsible
if the court will stop acting like Plaintiff is a Jew in Nazi Germany and allow it to be proven.
Plaintiff was never diabetic until after being deprived of sleep for five years by the implants torturing him by the
government. The diabetes is uncontrollable and changes depending on the kind and degree of the torture
administered with the implants. In the past the diabetes would go away when the torture was reduced and would
return when the torture was increased. Plaintiff Schlund did take the maximum dose of blood sugar control
medication and still could not control his sugar levels when under constant sleep deprivation. Plaintiff is sometimes
allowed some normal sleep and at other times is deprived of all sleep.
Plaintiff's blood sugar changes with the torture. The diabetes goes completely away under no torture and becomes
life threatening under heavy torture. Again this is murder by the courts in allowing this kind of torture and will result
in Plaintiff Death if it is not stopped by the court.
Plaintiff is under extremely heavy torture by the government as he writes this Motion and is threatened for many of
the things Plaintiff writes. To allow this kind of Obstruction of Justice and Witness Tampering in the cover up is
outrageous conduct by the court. Plaintiff only asks the court to search for the truth and to open its eyes and see
the light and allow witnesses to testify and allow evidence to be presented without the government altering the
evidence pretending to be protecting an investigation which is surreal.
Therefore, Plaintiff Schlund requests the court to reconsider its position and open its eyes to the truth and act with
fundamental fairness and vacate its misplaced order of November 21, 2005 and judgment thereon and allow the case
to go forward in the interests of justice. Plaintiff Schlund asserts the above said contentions with highest regard for
the court and no disrespect intended to the court; but the issues raised by Plaintiff Schlund are nothing new to the
United States Supreme Court, exemplified in United States v. Lovett, 328 U.S. 303 (1946).**
In conclusion, the United States Supreme Court cites Alexander Hamilton, "…a limited constitution…(is) one which
contains certain specified exceptions to the legislative authority; such, for instance, as that it shall pass no bills of
attainder, no ex-post facto laws, and the like. Limitations of this kind can be preserved in practice no other way than
through the medium of the court's justice; whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of
the constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing," citing the Federalist Papers, No. 78 (328 U.S. 303, 315), Id.
The FBI and others were held individually liable in damages for the perpetual invasion of privacy, blacklisting,
selective investigation, and selective prosecution of the law. The original lawsuit documentation has been preserved
in archives and can be reviewed by this court if it wishes to see the detail of the factual allegations which existed,
which are similar to those in Plaintiff Schlund's case. This United States District Court has stated that Plaintiff
Schlund's allegations, under penalty of perjury in his Verified Complaint, are bizarre. This court could not stand with
strong legs and look into the judicial eyes of the United States Supreme Court's repeated decisions cited to this
court and claim the high court's dealing with similar cases is bizarre, because they accepted the factual allegations
which were true. Anything to the contrary is radical in thinking and bizarre in and of itself, with all due respect.
CONCLUSION
Based on the above said, this court is respectfully requested to reopen its eyes to the truth and vacate its November
21, 2005 decision and judgment thereon in the interests of justice. This court is respectfully requested to uphold its
duty, the same duty that is recognized by the United States Supreme Court and all of the cases controlling, placed
before this court for consideration and, as more eloquently stated by the United States Supreme Court in its
acknowledge of a bizarre factual situation concerning perpetual invasion of people's privacy, blacklisting, selective
investigation, and invasion of privacy which shackled the individuals to liability and damages for their wrongful acts
and conduct. Nobody is above the law. Not this court, not the FBI, not the DEA, and not Defendant Bush, whether
in their individual capacity, violating Plaintiff Schlund's rights, or under color of office or/and law. See, Clinton v.
Jones, 520 U.S. 1636 (1997); United States v. Lovett, 328 U.S. 303 (1946) and citations therein.
** Among other things, federal employees were blacklisted, selectively investigated through electronic surveillance
and other known forms of the time, of a perpetual nature, to invade their privacy by the FBI, who took the brunt of
the responsibilities, despite there were other agencies involved. The FBI conducted "wholsesale investigation" of
federal employees, which included judges; and the investigations were financed by Special Congressional
Appropriations. Thousands were investigated. The federal employees, including judges, claimed they did not get a
chance to prove themselves "innocent" of communism or "disloyalty" and judicially begged to have their day in
court. The Appropriations Committee promised "there would be no star chamber proceedings" (Id. at 711 and 713).
Dated: December 21st, 2005
By: Charles August Schlund, III
Plaintiff in Pro Per
ORIGINAL hand-delivered this 21st day
of December, 2005 to:
Clerk of the Court
U.S. District Court of Arizona
401 W. Washington Street
Phoenix, AZ 85009
and
COPIES of the foregoing mailed this
21st day of December, 2005 to:
Mr. Richard G. Patrick
Assistant U.S. Attorney
United States Attorney General's Office
Two Renaissance Square
40 North Central Avenue, Suite 1200
Phoenix, AZ 85004-4408
(602) 514-7760 (Fax)
(602) 514-7500 (O)
Attorney for Defendant
By_________________________
<><><><><><><><><><><>
Charles August Schlund, III
8520 N. 54th Drive
Glendale, AZ 85302
(602) 670-2017
Plaintiff in Pro Per
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
CHARLES AUGUST SCHLUND, III
Plaintiff,
vs.
GEORGE W. BUSH, an individual, et al.,
Defendants.
AMENDED NOTICE OF APPEAL
CIV 03-1590-PHX VAM
(Honorable Virginia A. Mathis)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Charles A. Schlund, III ("Plaintiff Schlund") hereby files his Amended Notice of Appeal to amend his Notice of Appeal
filed December 21, 2005, hereinafter referred to as the ("December 21, 2005 Appeal Notice").
In the December 21, 2005 Appeal Notice at p. 1, lns. 23-26, Plaintiff Schlund specifically reserved the right to amend
his Notice of Appeal as set forth below.
Plaintiff Schlund amends his December 21, 2005 Notice of Appeal and includes therein nunc pro tunc his appeal to
the final Order dated January 5, 2006 by the Honorable Virginia A. Mathis and her order denying Plaintiff's Motion for
Reconsideration of Order Dated November 21, 2005 (Doc. 55) and Motion to Strike Words from November 21, 2005
Order and Judgment Dated November 22, 2005 (Doc. 54) and incorporates said Order herein by this reference thereto.
Plaintiff Appellant Schlund appeals those orders and judgment set forth in the December 21, 2005 Notice of Appeal
and same of the January 5, 2006 Order as aforesaid.
Notice of Request for an Amended Docket.
Plaintiff/Appellant requests the Court issue an amended docket, including the (1) Notice of Renewal of Motion to
Strike Words/Phrases from the November 21, 2005 Order and Judgment dated November 22, 2005; (2) Order dated
January 5, 2006 denying Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration of Order dated November 21, 2005 (Doc. 55) and
Motion to Strike Words from November 21, 2005 Order and Judgment dated November 22, 2005 (Doc. 54); and (3)
Plaintiff's Amended Notice of Appeal and insert same on the docket for purposes of a complete record on appeal.
PROTEST
Plaintiff Appellant Schlund protest the courts use of TORTURE, SLEEP DEPRIVATION, ASSASSINATION ATTEMPTS
and DEATH THREATS against Plaintiff Appellant Schlund in the government's attempts at covering up George W.
Bush fixing the presidential elections of the United States and the government's attempts at stopping this legal
proceeding with the use of terrorism against Plaintiff Appellant Schlund.
Dated: March ___, 2006
By: Charles August Schlund, III
Plaintiff in Pro Per
ORIGINAL hand-delivered this ____ day
of March, 2006 to:
Clerk of the Court
U.S. District Court of Arizona
401 W. Washington Street
Phoenix, AZ 85009
and
COPIES of the foregoing mailed this
_____ day of March, 2006 to:
Mr. Richard G. Patrick
Assistant U.S. Attorney
United States Attorney General's Office
Two Renaissance Square
40 North Central Avenue, Suite 1200
Phoenix, AZ 85004-4408
(602) 514-7760 (Fax)
(602) 514-7500 (O)
Richard.patrick@usdoj.gov
Attorney for Defendant
By___________________________
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Charles August Schlund, III
8520 N. 54th Drive
Glendale, AZ 85302
(602) 670-2017
Plaintiff in Pro Per
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
CHARLES AUGUST SCHLUND, III
Plaintiff,
vs.
GEORGE W. BUSH, an individual, et al.,
Defendants.
NOTICE OF RENEWAL OF MOTION TO STRIKE WORDS FROM NOVEMBER 21, 2005 ORDER AND JUDGMENT DATED
NOVEMBER 22, 2005 BY PLAINTIFF.
AMENDED NOTICE OF APPEAL
CIV 03-1590-PHX VAM
(Honorable Virginia A. Mathis)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Charles A. Schlund, III ("Plaintiff Schlund") hereby submits his Notice of Renewal of Notice and Motion to Strike
Words from November 21, 2005 Order and Judgment Dated November 22, 2005, hereinafter referred to as ("Strike
Motion"). On or about December 23, 2005, Plaintiff's Strike Motion was filed with the Court and served on Assistant
U.S. Attorney, Mr. Richard G. Patrick, as set forth in the Proof of Service attached thereto. The Honorable Virginia A.
Mathis denied the motion.
Plaintiff voiced a continuous objection and moved to strike various words and phrases the Court unilaterally
fabricated and made up imaginary facts to rely upon that were not set forth anywhere in Plaintiff's Verified Complaint
or First Amended Complaint or in any pleading or motion thereafter filed with the Court, on Plaintiff's information
and belief. It is important the Court strike the improper and prejudicial words and phrases and fabricated words and
phrases conjured up by the Court which are specifically identified and set forth in Plaintiff Schlund's Strike Motion
filed on December 23, 2005. The activities of Judge Mathis in fabricating evidence to rely upon for purposes of
dismissing Plaintiff's action is in violation of her oath of office and prejudicially violates of Plaintiff Schlund's due
process and equal protection rights under the United States Constitution.
Such fabrication of words into the Court's order by Judge Mathis reveals a total disregard of fairness, objectivity,
and impartiality of a federal judge and gives the gross appearance of impropriety, which has had and will continue to
have a severe chilling effect on the public's trust in her as a federal judge and the federal judicial system of which
she represents. Plaintiff Schlund incorporates his Strike Motion filed December 23, 2005 by this reference thereto as
though set forth verbatim.
On Plaintiff Schlund's information and belief, further grounds for this Motion of Renewal of the Strike Motion is
based on the repetitive, unusual, and peculiar acts and conduct and statements of Judge Mathias and her sending
the United States Marshals to Plaintiff's home to engage in witness tampering of Plaintiff and attempt to intimidate
Plaintiff through the United States Marshall's questioning of Plaintiff's children while Plaintiff was not home, and her
fabrication of the words and phrases, in particular, "…implanted a mind control device….used to torture him," and
the like inordinate concept injected into Plaintiff's Causes of Action against Defendant, it appears Judge Mathis may
be suffering from delusions resulting in the loss of her objectivity, impartiality, and fairness required by her as a
federal judge and under the United States Constitution, irrespective of her status, compelling her to violate her
aforesaid duties and completely disregard the pursuits of truth and the interests of justice mandated by the federal
court system and her duties as a federal officer of the court, bound by same, with all due respect to Judge Mathis.
As aforesaid, this is particularly true as to Judge Mathis' use of the words "alleged co-conspirators," connected to
her created imbalanced concept "implanted a mind control device" in Plaintiff, which never existed in Plaintiff's
Complaint, which she then connected to the concept of planting a "mind control device" not raised by Plaintiff. It
appears the judge herself has a personal focus on two things she conjured up in her mind: (1) "implanted a mind
control device" and (2) "alleged co-conspirators" which may be indicative of delusionary episodes, paranoid
delusions, or incompetency or both by the judge, with all due respect.
Plaintiff states the aforesaid not as a matter of disrespect to Judge Mathis but as a factual reality based on words
which were fabricated or otherwise distorted by the judge and then injected into Plaintiff's lawsuit which previously
did not exist, which the Judge used to rely upon to justify the improper and systematic dismissal of a meritorious
action at a premature stage of the litigation. The use of Mind Control against Plaintiff Schlund is not in Plaintiff
Schlund's lawsuit and no one controls Plaintiff Schlund's mind. The lawsuit is over the use of electronic wireless
telemetry used in conjunction with associated electronic product(s) used to invade the privacy of and torture of
Plaintiff Schlund, who previously worked for the government, violating the his rights protected under the
Constitution of the United States. His lawsuit states the personal and political motive for said violations is he is
selectively targeted as a political witness against the Defendant George W. Bush and others who fixed the
presidential elections of the United States to appoint Bush. The Court is requested to take judicial notice under
Federal Rules of Evidence 201 of these facts.
PROTEST
Plaintiff /Appellant Schlund protests the Court's protection of the Defendant's use of wireless electronic methods for
INVASION OF PRIVACY, TORTURE, SLEEP DEPRIVATION, ASSASSINATION ATTEMPTS, WITNESS TAMPERING and
DEATH THREATS against Plaintiff/Appellant Schlund in the government's attempts at covering up Defendant George
W. Bush's fixing of the presidential elections of the United States. Plaintiff has alleged, based on his personal
knowledge, he has been targeted long ago as a political witness against Defendant and his family and while
involuntarily classified in this status, Defendant will continue his campaign under color of authority/office to violate
Plaintiff's legal rights, including the thwarting of any litigation of pursuing and disclosing the truth as Plaintiff has
stated in his Verified Complaint as a selectively targeted political witness.
CONCLUSION
Based on the aforesaid, Plaintiff Schlund respectively requests the Court to grant his Motion of Renewal of his
Strike Motion and strike the improper words and phrases it injected in its dismissal order, attempting to justify its
erroneous dismissal of a meritorious action, causing bias, gross prejudice, and confusion of the issues in the record
on appeal, further violating Plaintiff's due process and equal protection rights under the Constitution of the United
States.
The fabrication of the words and phrases by the Court is also causing the Court and then the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals to improperly judicially profile the case into a category of which it does not belong, nor intended by Plaintiff
at the time it was filed, causing further prejudice to Plaintiff, violating his equal protection and due process rights.
Plaintiff objects, which shall constitute a continuing objection to the improper judicial profiling of Plaintiff's case
based in part or whole on the said fabrication of words and phrases of Judge Mathis as specifically identified and
subject to Plaintiff's Strike Motion filed December 23, 2005 before the Court.
As an aside, Plaintiff reminds the Court that the old adage, "Respect is earned not demanded," applies to the Court
as well as Plaintiff.
Dated: March 10, 2006
By: Charles August Schlund, III
Plaintiff in Pro Per
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
ORIGINAL hand-delivered this 10th day
of March, 2006 to:
Clerk of the Court
U.S. District Court of Arizona
401 W. Washington Street
Phoenix, AZ 85009
and
COPIES of the foregoing mailed this
10th day of March, 2006 to:
Mr. Richard G. Patrick
Assistant U.S. Attorney
United States Attorney General's Office
Two Renaissance Square
40 North Central Avenue, Suite 1200
Phoenix, AZ 85004-4408
(602) 514-7760 (Fax)
(602) 514-7500 (O)
Richard.patrick@usdoj.gov
Attorney for Defendant
By____________________________
