IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

OF LANCASTER COUNTY
CIVIL DIVISION
___________________________________________

STANLEY J. CATERBONE and ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP

CASE NO. CI-15-10167

Plaintiffs v.
HOTEL BRUNSWICK, ROGER FITZWATER, JR., WOODCREST AUDIO
and THE JAMES STREET INVESTMENT DISTRICT
and THE LANCASTER FILM COMMISSION, et.,al.
PETITION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
TO THE HONORABLE, THE JUDGES OF SAID COURT:
(1) I am the (check one) X PLAINTIFF DEFENDANT in the above matter and do live alone
and because of my financial condition I am unable to pay the required filing fee of $ 171.00.
(2) I am unable to obtain funds from anyone, including my family and associates, to
pay this fee.
(3)Check one:
(4) I am currently a recipient of the following type(s) of Benefits from the Social Security
Administration for Long Term Disability Benefits for illnesses and symptoms relating to
U.S. Sponsored Mind Control as evidenced by my documentation and the fact that no
medical reports or physicians were reported in the entire application process and there
was never a psychiatric evaluation for the same said purposes. I am receiving a net
monthly benefit of $1330.00 and have been since April of 2008 and was declared disabled
in December of 2005, the same said month that I reported that I became the victim of
full-time synthetic telepathy, as well as other related symptoms and illnesses.
X I am not currently receiving cash or medical Public Assistance benefits, but I am
attaching a completed Poverty Affidavit that verifies my financial condition, and why I
cannot afford to pay the aforementioned filing fee.
I verify that the statement made in this Petition, and attached Poverty Affidavit (if applicable),
are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties
of 18 Pa.C.S.A. 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
/S/ Stanley J. Caterbone
Date: November 24, 2015

Stanley J. Caterbone, Pro Se Litigant

Advanced Media Group
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
717-669-2163
scaterbone@live.com
www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com

MOTION FOR LEAVE OF IN FORMA PAUPERIS

AND NOW, on this 24th

day of November, 2015 I, STANLEY J. CATERBONE and

ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP, Petitioners, appearing pro se, do hereby file the Application for In
Forma Pauperis.

If the Court would consider the leqal circumstances surrounding my

Whistleblowing activities and the Federal False Claims Act filing of the Petitioner as it relates to
the past 28 years and the myriad of violations of the Lancaster County District Attorney. The
Petitioner wil argue that it is wholly unfair and unconstitutional not to grant the Petitioner In
Forma Pauperis Status. The Petitioner has filed ample evidence of a pattern and relentless cycle
of earning and accumulating capital and assets, as well building substantial worth through his
business interests, only to have it all extorted through an elaborate civil and criminal scheme to
defruad. Therefore any attempt to subject the Petitioner to more court related fees is
only a continuation of that same said fraud.
Consideration should be given to Pederson v. South Williamsport Area School District,
where the courts interpreted due process, as Essentially fundamental fairness is exactly what
due process means. Furthermore, the United States District Courts in Perry v. Coyler (1978,
524 F 2d. 644) have concluded the following:

Even the probability of unfairness can result

in a defendant being deprived of his due process rights.

The focus of these claims are

recorded in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 05-2288 and
06-4650.

In addition the Petioner is the MOVANT in the Lisa Michelle Lambrerrt Case and

recently filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, 04-2559, which was recently appealed to the
Third Circuit Court of Appeals. The preceding cases have been preserved by the Third Circuit
Court of Appeals in case no. 07-4474, see attached.
The prosecutorial misconduct the the Petitioner has been subject to has violated his
constitutional rights, but more importantly the abuse or process has prevented the Petitioner
from completing a wealth of claims in both state and federal Courts. 1983 Civil Rights Acts and
18 U.S.C.A. Acts state the following: The underlying purpose of the scheme of protecting
constitutional rights are to permit victims of constitutional violations to obtain redress, to
provide for federal prosecution of serious constitutional violations when state criminal
proceedings are ineffective for purpose of deterring violations and to strike a balance between
protection of individual rights from state infringement and protection from state and local
government from federal interference, 18 U.S.C.A. 241, 242; U.S.C.A. Const. Art. 2, 53;
Amend. 13, 14, 5, 15, 2: 42 U.S.C.A. 1981-1982, 1985, 1988, Fed. Rules Civil Proc. Rule
28, U.S.C.A.

A case can be made for a RICO violation as defined in the case of United States v. Holck,
389 F. Supp. 2d. 338, criminal responsibility defines single or multiple conspiracies by the
following: Governments, without committing variance between single conspiracy charges in an
indictment and its proof at trial may establish existence at continuing core conspiracy which
attracts different members at different times and which involves different subgroups committing
acts in furtherance of an overall plan. This illustrates the legal analysis of the 1987 conspiracy
to cover-up my International Signal & Control, Plc., whistle blowing activities.
The attached 29 False Arrests, which under Pennsylvania Law, constitute a conspiracy that
may be proved by circumstantial evidence that is by acts and circumstances sufficient to warrant
an inference that the unlawful combination has been in front of facts formed for the purpose
charged.

See Walcker v. North Wales Boro, 395 F. Supp. 2d. 219.

In the same case the

following was supported: Arrestees allegations that the township (Conestoga) and its police
officers were acting in concert and conspiracy and with the purpose of violating arrestees
constitutional rights by subjecting him to unreasonable force, arrest, search, and malicious
prosecution and the two (2) or more officers acted together in throwing arrestee to the ground
(April 5th, 2006 and August 4th, 2006) and forcing him to take two (2) blood tests and holding
him in custody. The preceding pleaded civil conspiracy claims under Pennsylvania Law.
1.In order to state a claim for civil conspiracy and a cause of action under Pennsylvania Law, a
plaintiff must allege that two (2) or more persons agree or combine with lawful intent to do an
unlawful act or to do an otherwise lawful act by unlawful means, with proof of malice with intent
to injure the person, his/her property and or business. In the case of United States v. Holck,
389 F. Supp. 2d. 338, criminal responsibility defines single or multiple conspiracies by the
following: Governments, without committing variance between single conspiracy charges in an
indictment and its proof at trial may establish existence at continuing core conspiracy which
attracts different members at different times and which involves different subgroups committing
acts in furtherance of an overall plan. 1983 Civil Rights Acts and 18 U.S.C.A. Acts state the
following: The underlying purpose of the scheme of protecting constitutional rights are to
permit victims of constitutional violations to obtain redress, to provide for federal prosecution of
serious constitutional violations when state criminal proceedings are ineffective for purpose of
deterring violations and to strike a balance between protection of individual rights from state
infringement and protection from state and local government from federal interference, 18
U.S.C.A. 241, 242; U.S.C.A. Const. Art. 2, 53; Amend. 13, 14, 5, 15, 2: 42 U.S.C.A.
1981-1982, 1985, 1988, Fed. Rules Civil Proc. Rule 28, U.S.C.A.

Under RICO, a person or group who commits any two of 35 crimes27 federal crimes and
8 state crimeswithin a 10-year period and, in the opinion of the US Attorney bringing the case,
has committed those crimes with similar purpose or results can be charged with racketeering.
Those found guilty of racketeering can be fined up to $25,000 and/or sentenced to 20 years in
prison. In addition, the racketeer must forfeit all ill-gotten gains and interest in any business
gained through a pattern of "racketeering activity." The act also contains a civil component that
allows plaintiffs to sue for triple damages. When the U.S. Attorney decides to indict someone
under RICO, he has the option of seeking a pre-trial restraining order or injunction to prevent
the transfer of potentially forfeitable property, as well as require the defendant to put up a
performance bond. This provision is intended to force a defendant to plead guilty before
indictment. There is also a provision for private parties to sue. A "person damaged in his
business or property" can sue one or more "racketeers." There must also be an "enterprise." The
defendant(s) are not the enterprise, in other words, the defendant(s) and the enterprise are not
one and the same. There must be one of four specified relationships between the defendant(s)
and the enterprise. This lawsuit, like all Federal civil lawsuits, can take place in either Federal or
State court. http://www.dealer-magazine.com/index.asp?article=481
Where RICO laws might be applied1
Although some of the RICO predicate acts are extortion and blackmail, one of the most
Successful applications of the RICO laws has been the ability to indict or sanction individuals for
their behavior and actions committed against witnesses and victims in alleged retaliation or
retribution for cooperating with law enforcement or intelligence agencies. The RICO laws can be
alleged in cases where civil lawsuits or criminal charges are brought against individuals or
corporations in retaliation for said individuals or corporations working with law enforcement, or
against individuals or corporations who have sued or filed criminal charges against a defendant.

References

RICO Suave (http://www.snopes.com/language/acronyms/rico.asp) . Snopes.com: (21 December 2004).

Retrieved on 2006-03-26. 1.
External links
RICO Act from Cornell University'sU. S. Code database
(http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sup_01_18_10_I_20_96.html) Detail of Tanya Andersen's
claim against Atlantic Records (http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2005/10/oregon-riaa-victim-fightsback- sues.html) Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeer_Influenced_and_Corrupt_Organizations_Act
Categories: Articles with weasel words | United States federal legislation | Organized crime terminology

Anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) laws can be applied in an

attempt to curb alleged abuses of the legal system by individuals or corporations who utilize the
courts as a weapon to retaliate against whistle blowers, victims, or to silence another's speech.
RICO could be alleged if it can be shown that lawyers and/or their clients conspired and
collaborated to concoct fictitious legal complaints solely in retribution and retaliation for
themselves having been brought before the courts. These laws also apply to victims of clergy
abuse where statute of limitations has run out.
Dated November 24th , 2015

Stanley J. Caterbone
Advanced Media Group, President and Owner
Pro Se Litigant, U.S. District Court & Pennsylvania Common Pleas Court
Scaterbone@Live.com
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
717-669-2163

PETITION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS & AFFIDAVIT

b.) Employment: None
If you are presently employed, state your:
Employer: ________________________________________________ 1. I am the petitioner in
the above matter and because of my financial condition am unable to pay the fees and costs of
prosecuting or defending this action or proceeding.
Employers Address: ________________________________________
__________________________________________________
Salary or wages per month: ___________________________________
Type of work: _____________________________________________
If you are presently unemployed, state:
Date of last employment: ____________________________________
Salary or wages per month: ___________________________________
Type of work: _____________________________________________
c.) Please list any other income received within the past twelve months:
(Write the gross amount (before taxes) per month that you received and the months
you received this income.)
Business or profession: ___________________________________
Other self-employment: __________________________________
Interest: ______________________________________________
Dividends: _____________________________________________
Pension and annuities: ___________________________________
Social security benefits: _________________________________
Support payments: ______________________________________
Disability payments: $ 1330.00
Unemployment compensation and/or supplemental benefits: ________
______________________________________________________
Workers Compensation: ________________________________ Public assistance:
_______________________________________
Other: ________________________________________________
d.) Other contributions to household support:
(Write the gross amount (before taxes) per month that you received and the months
you received this income.)

(Wife) (Husband) Name: _________________________________

If your (wife) (husband) is employed, please state
Employer: _____________________________________________
Salary or wages per month: ________________________________
Type of work: __________________________________________
Contributions from children: _______________________________
Contributions from parents: _______________________________
Other contributions: _____________________________________
e.) Property owned:
Cash: $ 1300.00
Checking Account: $ 23,000.00
Savings Account: $2,495.00
Certificates of deposit: ___________________________________
Real estate (including home): Ownership of 1250 Fremont Street, Lancaster, PA with brothers
Motor Vehicle: 2007 Honda CRV Loan Amount with Warranty $12,000 purchased June of 2015
Stocks and bonds: 7 shares of Fulton Financial (FULT)
Other: Social Security Account $24, 000.00
f.) Debts and obligations:
Mortgage: Taxes and Insurances $400.00
Utilities $600.00
Copy and Printing Expenses for pro se litigation: $150.00
Chamber of Commerce Membership: $ 35.00
Food and Clothing: $ 200.00
Computer Hacking Repairs and Computer Replacement: $40.00
House Security Expenses: $30.00
Auto Loan: $ 220.00
Auto Expenses: $ 80.00
TOTAL MONTHLY EXPENSES: $ 1,755.00
Loans: ________________________________________________
Other: Total Liabilities from Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Case No. 05-23059 in the U.S. Bankruptcy
Court for Eastern Pennsylvania that was
DISMISSED IN 2011 IS $ 141,000.00
(Write all of your regular monthly bills, phone, utilities, cable, insurance, etc.)
g.) Persons dependent upon you for support: None

4. I understand that I have a continuing obligation to inform the court of improvement in my

financial circumstances which would permit me to pay the costs incurred herein. 5. I
verify that the statements made in this affidavit are true and correct. I understand that
false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. 4904, relating
to unsworn falsification to authorities.

/S/ Stanley J. Caterbone

Date: November 24, 2015

Stanley J. Caterbone, Pro Se Litigant

Advanced Media Group
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
717-669-2163
scaterbone@live.com
www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

OF LANCASTER COUNTY
CIVIL DIVISION
___________________________________________

STANLEY J. CATERBONE and ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP

CASE NO. CI-15-10167

Plaintiffs v.
HOTEL BRUNSWICK, ROGER FITZWATER, JR., WOODCREST AUDIO
and THE JAMES STREET INVESTMENT DISTRICT
and THE LANCASTER FILM COMMISSION, et.,al.

_______________________________________________________

AND NOW, this day of , 20 , upon consideration of the attached Petition and
Affidavit of Financial Status, it is hereby Ordered that the Petitioner, Stanley J.
Caterbone and Advanced Media Group is permitted to proceed with the filing of his/her
action or appeal In Forma Pauperis, and shall not be required to pay the costs or fees
payable in connection with such matter, but conditioned upon his/her payment of such
costs from the proceeds of an financial recovery in this case.

BY THE COURT:
_____________________________
J.