FOTP Editor Files RICO Lawsuit Against County & District Clerks Association of Texas

 (emphasis added)

“…create a criminal enterprise under the misrepresentation of a Government Office, for the express intent to reclassify Plaintiffs as offenders, or abusers to meet a condition precedent for CDCAT to fraudulently qualify Plaintiffs’ family and children for CDCAT Multiple Employer Welfare Benefit Plan and Trust.”

“…entered into various Rule 11 agreements absent Plaintiffs’ consent, discussion, or agreement.  Plaintiffs are still unable to obtain a record or accounting of such Rule 11 agreements.  Said actions constitute a serious Breach of Fiduciary Duty, and Plaintiffs request this court to issue relief as allowed by law.”

“20.       Various District County Courts issued a “General Order, which is described as a standing order to protect property and children pending litigation of a divorce or child custody order. .. Included in the standing order is the following:

“No party to this lawsuit requested this order.  Rather, this order is a   standing order of the Collin County District Courts that applies in every divorce suit and every suit affecting the parent-child relationship filed in  Collin County.  The District Courts of Collin County have adopted this order because the parties and their children should be protected and their  property preserved with the lawsuit is pending before the court.”

21.       Defendants created the standing order which has the same effect as a Protective Order under Texas Family Code Section 85. The rules of procedure are significantly different for processing cases in which the parties are parties to a Protective Order verses processing a court case when the parties are free from such.

Readers and researchers will see one phrase used repeatedly, and the context of this is crucial to understanding  the entire case. Lisa Fussell is not just any editor of mine. Her father is the architect of an investment vehicle Collin County’s government implemented for themselves: a Multiple Employer Benefit Plan

“Said order, reduced to writing, will also include multiple clauses and contractual terms as necessary for Defendants to process the Divorce Decree as a contract which purports the parties agree to participate in Defendants’ Multiple Employer Benefit Plan. “

This is pretty powerful verbage too, as this gets to how the judiciary in Collin County (and probably all over the country) is basically one gigantic corporation:

Certain Plaintiffs represented themselves through the duration of their cases.  A significant amount of Defendants success depends on misrepresentation by association attorneys.  Absent this advantage, Defendants resort to wholly falsifying court documents or tampering with government documents.  Plaintiff, [redacted by publisher], had previously divorced in Collin and Grayson Counties.

Through the course of [redacted by publisher]’s present involvement with Defendants, CDCAT completely rewrote Plaintiffs previous Divorce Decrees, which were entered by the presiding judge after her ex-husband signed a 2002 waiver under the waiver provision.

Defendants fraudulently rewrote the orders as Agreed Orders moreover adding provisions into the order that enrolled [redacted by publisher]’s children so as to receive benefits from the Multiple Employer Benefit Plan.  Defendants not only added and rewrote the previous orders, but moreover forged [redacted by publisher]’s signatures, backdated clerk stamps and substituted Official Notary Statements.

So, what happens when one goes up against the “Corporation?”

“The Honorable Judge John Roach Jr. forewarned her of his intended retaliation a month before the DA filed the charges.”

“[Another plaintiff] was falsely imprisoned on a court order that was never set for hearing.”

“[Another] Plaintiff was indicted on a court order that was vaguely rendered that does not exist.”

A list of the generalities that are being alleged that the County & District Clerks Association of Texas committed:

1. Abuse of Process
2. Statutory Fraud
3. Fraud of Nondisclosure
4. Bad faith
5. Defamation
6. Malicious Prosecution
7. Mail obstruction and unlawful mail opening
8. Negligent Misrepresentation, and
9. Conspiracy

 The plaintiffs filed suit against the County & District Clerks Association of Texas (CDCAT), which is “under the authority of the International Association of Clerks, Recorders, Election Officials and Treasurers (IACREAOT),” specifically alleging the following:

[Emphasis by The Ellis County Observer publisher]

–> Plaintiffs recently discovered check dispersing of substantial sums of money from the court Registry of certain court cases in which Plaintiffs’ children are designated in the Odyssey System as “Secured Parties”

–> Defendants further retaliated against Plaintiffs who unsuccessfully inquired about the registry checks utilizing various forms of intimidation which included abuse of power.  Plaintiff, contacted the presiding officer of the commissioner’s court, Keith Self, about the Registry disbursements in collin county that where discovered in the family law case. (See exhibit B).

Within five days, said Plaintiff was brought before the court in a disposition for the family law case, however,  the disposition was a unexplainable thrust on plaintiff mere days after his inquiry to Judge Self.  The family law councilor questioning him focused the “deposition”  to the subject of the inquiry to Commissioner Self.  A few examples are “have you been harmed in some way because of any money transferred in the Registry”, and “what do you think the checks you saw written in the Register mean to you?”

 Documents:
[Word Document | Click Here to Read, Download or Print | Federal Lawsuit vs. CDCAT]

[PDF | Click Here to Read, Download or Print | CDCAT Bylaws]

 See Also: Freedom of the Press Group Collin County https://www.facebook.com/pages/Freedom-of-the-Press-Group-Collin-County/187102218005916

See Also: FOTP Group Editor Re-Indicted http://www.elliscountyobserver.com/2011/06/09/1-of-my-editors-has-been-re-indicted-in-collin-county/

See Also: Brooke Muncie-Weltzer Bogus Kidnapping Arrest; McKinney Cops Cover-Up
http://www.elliscountyobserver.com/2011/05/09/collin-county-brooke-muncie-weltzer-didnt-kidnap-her-son/

See Also: ARC of Texas Process in Texas Courts System:
http://www.elliscountyobserver.com/2011/05/27/chart-arc-process-in-texas-court-system-does-ellis-county-work-this-way-too/

ARC Chart Below:

Program

1. Academy of Special Needs Planners

2. ARC (Non-Profit Corporation)

3. Municipal District

4. Court System

Players

1. Title IV-D (Attorney General)

2. DFPS

3. Judges

4. Bank of America and JP Morgan Bank

5. Psychologists / Home Study Experts

6. Special Needs Attorneys

7. Abusive Parent

8. Our Children

9. Protective Parent

10. Law Enforcement

 Process

1. The Court orders Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR)

2. The Special Needs Attorney determines the wealth of the family

3.  One of the parent becomes the target of the courts, DFPS, and law enforcement

4. To obtain evidence the Court orders a psychological exam and a home study

5. The Court utilizes the evidence to build an adverse case against one parent

6. The build a stronger case DFPS testifies in Court about the TI’s drugs, abuse, mental instability

7. Judge removes conservatorship rights

8. Special Needs Attorney assumes temporary guardianship using the temporary guardianship form

9. Working in cooperation with DFPS and the ARC program – the children are labelled with special needs

10. A trust fund is established by the Special Needs Attorney vis-a-via the ARC

11. Bank of America and JP Morgan Bank then invests the money or borrow against assets

12. The trust fund is overseen by the municpal districts and the Title IV-D Office

Outcome $$

1. Pooled Trusts

2. Liens

2. Domestic and international 501C corporations

3. Retirement Funds