Jud Not Eric Holder

Honorable court of record
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

(69:C:RiWs,09-CR-141-S, 08-CR-054-S NOTICE of COMPLAINT Court to take Judicial Notice Under Federal Rules of Evidence 201(f)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

Defendant

Shane C. Buczek,

Petitioner Buczek notices the court to take Judicial Notice of Complaint letter to the Attorney General under Federal Rules of Evidence 201(f). See Exhibit "A"

In Trust,

All rights reserved UCC 1-308 Without prejudice without recourse c/o 7335 Derby Road

Derby, New York Republic

Non Domestic without the U.S

~ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

On this the L day of September, 2010, a true and correct copy was personally delivered to the Clerk of the Court and the Clerk will serve counsel by electronic filing.

"

"

PROOF OF MAILING AND CONTENTS MAILED

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. SHANE CHRISTOPHER BUCZEK aU. S. TRUST 1 :08- cr-00054- WMS-HKS Filed 03/04/2008, 1 :09-cr-00 121- WMS-HKS Filed 04/21/2009 and 1 :09-cr-00 14.1 - WMS-HKS Filed 05/07/2009: COUNTERFEIT SECURITY

I

---r'---;7"

I, ....._ .... , __ /.J;«~ .... /~--.-"'-'-r,:'-t_~ _,""'>_..;;a"--'IL=-_'_'(:.;;_- , a Notary Public, do hereby certify and

It-

affirm that on the date ofSeptember2_2010, on behalf of the U.S.TRUST SHANE

CHRISTOPHER BUCZEK (Defendant and transmitting utility)c/o 7335 Derby

Road Derby New York and I caused a true and correct copy mail documents on

COUNTERFEIT SECURITY AND FALSE ARREST BY U.S. GOVERNEMENT

ANTHONY BRUCE AUSA OF (15) PAGES

(1) Counterfeit Security indictment AUSA Anthony Bruce (2) Counterfeit CUSIP Securities by Fidelity for all 3 cases

(3) Counterfeit Security Judge's Orders in letter to Eric Holder

(4) Motions filed into District Court Western New York on Counterfeit Securities

Fraud issues And the caused the envelope to be sealed & deposited with the United

States Post Service, Return Receipt Requested with Green Card sent:

=Failure to answer is silence. Silence can only be equated with fraud where there islegal and moral duty to speak, or when inquiry left unanswered would be intentionally misleading. nus v Tweel(1977)550 F 2d 297.* (10) days to answer and (3) days Grace OPPORTUNITY TO CURE *

) Acknowledgement

) Sworn and Subscribed:

County of Erie ) for verification purposes only

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me by shane-christopher the living soul, known to me OJ' proven' to II\e to be the real man signing this document this __ day of September ~O WITNESS my hand and official

seal. /,/ " " /

,,.:L k=4 ... k,/f I~ NOTARY PUBLiC'"

State of New York

(Seal) DATE

t1 I e.


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. SHANE CHRISTOPHER BUCZEK a (J. S. TRUST 1 :08- cr-00054-WMS-HKS Filed 03/04/2008,1 :09-cr-00121-WMS-HKS Filed 04/2112009 and 1 :09-cr-00141-WMS-HKS Filed 05/07/2009: COUNTERFEIT SECURITY

Reponses to: (with in 20 days) Notary Repu~lic:

/ ,,\tI !Lf C~j,(_ -: L~

IJ ______ -'-- __ '-".....;)'--"-, \.Li

America without the U.S

Cc. Petition To:

Commandant (G-OPL)

U.S. Coast Guard

2100 2nd St. SW Washington, DC 20593-0001

CERTIFIED MAIL 70070710 04101 S486 .~9S9

SEC Headquarters 100 F Street, NE Washington, DC 20549 (202)942-8088

(( R.I uun \lAII 7007 ()710 (J001 :'i..J.X6'XO)

New York Regional Office

George S. Canellos, Regional Director 3 World Financial Center, Suite 400 New York. NY 10281-1022

[ fR !IFlID \1 \IT 7on7 0710 000l"..J.R6 vs:»

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION,TORT BRANCH FEDERAL TORT CLAIM ACT STAFF

BOX 888 BENJAMIN FRANKLIN STATION W ASHINGTON,D.C. 20044

c I R 1'11·11 [) \.1 \ II 700R nsoo noon 1 mn 2499

Universal Postal Union International Bureau Case postal

3000 BERNE 15

SWITZERLAND Tel.: +41 31 35031 11 Fax:+41313503110

REGISTERED MAIL RR 353 687 385 LTS

PROOF OF MAILING AND CONTENTS MAILED UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. SHANE CHRISTOPHER BUCZEK a . S. TRUST 1 :08- cr-00054- WMS-HKS Filed 03/04/2008, 1 :09-cr-00 121- WMS-HKS Filed 04/2112009 and 1:09-cr-00141-WMS-HKS Filed 05/07/2009: COUNTERFEIT SECURITY

Secretary Janet Napolitano Department of Homeland Security

U.S. Department of Homeland Security Washington, DC 20528

US First Mail

Pope Benedit XVI 00120 Vatican City State EUROPE

REG·ISTERED MAIL RR 353 687 394 l S

Investigator Walter Benson Kenneth May

Dianne Brennan

F.O.LA.

Depository Trust Company 55 Water Street

New York, New York 10041 Fax 212.855.8685

Phone 212.855.8698

CERTIFIED '\1AIL 7()04 116000035301 5587

Patricia D. Harris

F.O.LA./P.A. Section, Room 115 Loc Justice Management Division

U.S. Department of Justice

Constitution A venue and Tenth Street NW Washington, D.C. 20530

Phone 301.436.1018

US First Class Mail

Eric Holder Jr.

United States Attorney General Department of Justice

950 Pennsylvania Ave. NW 20530 Washington, D. C. 20530

( I RI I Flf J) \1 \ II 700X O:'i()(j DOOO lOX, 2505

3


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. SHANE CHRISTOPHER BUCZEK a LJ. S. TRUST 1 :08- cr-00054-WMS-HKS Filed 03/04/2008, 1:09-cr-00121-WMS-HKS Filed 04/21/2009 and 1 :09-cr-00 141- WMS- HKS Filed 05/07/2009: COUNTERFEIT SECURITY

4

SHANE CHRISTOPHER BUCZEK a U.S. TRUST In care of: 7335 Derby Road

Derby, New York, America

Non Domestic, without the US

September 2, 2010

Eric Holder Jr.


950 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Washington, D. C. 20530

7008 1083

RE: USA v. Shane Christopher Buczek, 08-cr-054-s, 09-cr-121-s and 09-cr-141-s United States District Court, Western District of New York, 68 Court Street Buffalo New York America

(1) Counterfeit security indictments in the following cases;

A. 08-cr-054-s DATE: MARCH 4, 2008

PLEA DEAL March 25, 2010 William M. Skretny, Chief Judge

B. 09-cr-121-s DATE: APRIL 21, 2009 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder, Jr., William M.

Skretny, Chief Judge

C. 09-cr-141-s DATE: MAY 7, 2009 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder, Jr.:

PLEA DEAL March 25,2010 William M. Skretny, Chief Judge

(2) Counterfeit security arrest warrants in three cases;

A. Case 08-cr-054-s

1. Arrest Warrant Docket #1 March 7, 2008

2. Arrest Warrant Docket # 51 August 28, 2008

3. Arrest Warrant Docket # 90 February 9, 2009

4. Arrest Warrant Docket # 145 October 19,2009

B.) Case 09-cr-121-s

1. Arrest Warrant Docket # 37 August 14,2009

C.) Case 09-cr-141-s

1. Arrest Warrant Docket #37 August 14,2009

2. Plea Agreement Docket #67 March 25, 2010

1

(3) Counterfeit Security Judge's Order s, A.) Case 08-cr-054-s

1. ORDER Docket # 5 March 18,2008 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder Jr.

2. ORDER Docket # 6 March 21, 2008 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder Jr.



5. ORDER Docket # 13 March 26, 2008 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder Jr.

6. ORDER Docket # 23 April 16, 2008 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder Jr.

7. ORDER Docket # 24 April 16, 2008 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder Jr.

8. ORDER Docket # 29 May 8, 2008 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder Jr.

9. ORDER Docket # 32 May 13,2008 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder Jr.

10. ORDER Docket # 48 August 7, 2008 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder Jr.

11. ORDER Docket # 54 August 21,2008 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder Jr.

12. ORDER Docket # 53 August 22,2008 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder Jr.

13. ORDER Docket # 62 September 5,2008 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder Jr.

14. ORDER Docket # 63 September 5, 2008 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder Jr.

15. ORDER Docket # 64 October 1,2008 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder Jr.

16. ORDER Docket # 72 October 30, 2008 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder Jr.

17. ORDER Docket # 86 January 12,2009 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder Jr.

18. ORDER Docket # 89 January 20, 2009 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder Jr.


20. ORDER Docket # 96 June 152009 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder Jr.


22. ORDER Docket # 105 June 17,2009 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder Jr.

23. ORDER Docket # 118 July 14,2009 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder Jr.



26. ORDER Docket # 128 July 24, 2009 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder Jr.





31. ORDER Docket # 140 September 11, 2009 Judge William M. Skretny

32. ORDER Docket # 141 September 30,2009 Judge William M. Skretny

33. ORDER Docket # 150 December 11,2009 Judge William M. Skretny



36. ORDER Docket # 155 December 30, 2009 Judge William M. Skretny

37. ORDER Docket # 156 January 4, 2010 Judge William M. Skretny

38. ORDER Docket # 157 January 11,2010 Judge William M. Skretny


40. ORDER Docket # 168 February 16,2010 Judge William M. Skretny

41. ORDER Docket # 181 March 16,2010 Judge William M. Skretny

42. ORDER Docket # 188 March 22, 2010 Judge William M. Skretny

2

43. ORDER Docket # 205 July 19, 2010

44. ORDER Docket # 211 July 26,2010

45. ORDER Docket # 207 August 6,2010


Judge William M. Skretny Judge William M. Skretny Judge William M. Skretny Judge William M. Skretny

B.) Case 09-cr-121-s



3. ORDER Docket # 6 June 9, 2009 Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder Jr.


5. ORDER Docket # 31 September 11,2009 Judge William M. Skretny


7. ORDER Docket #52 December 30, 2009 Judge William M. Skretny









16. ORDER Docket # 122 May 3, 2010 Judge William M. Skretny

17. ORDER Docket # 135 July 1,2010 Judge William M. Skretny





22. ORDER Docket # 169 August 19,2010 Judge William M. Skretny



C.) Case 09-cr-141-s









9. ORDER Docket # 33 September 11, 2009 Judge William M. Skretny






3

15. ORDER Docket # 51 January 21, 2010

16. ORDER Docket # 55 February 16,2010







23. ORDER Docket # 93 August 6, 2010


Judge William M. Skretny Judge William M. Skretny Judge William M. Skretny Judge William M. Skretny Judge William M. Skretny Judge William M. Skretny Judge William M. Skretny

Judge William M. Skretny Judge William M. Skretny Judge William M. Skretny

Dear Attorney General Holder:

You are hereby put on NOTICE pursuant to alleged valid Title 18 USC § 4, of the commission of crimes cognizable by a court of the United States under alleged valid Title 18 USC §513 to wit: 513(a) Whoever makes, utters or possesses a counterfeited security ofa State or a political subdivision thereof or of an organization, or whoever makes, utters or possesses a forged security of a State or political subdivision thereof or of an organization, with intent to deceive another person, organization, or government shall be fined not more than $250,000 or imprisoned not more than 5-10 years, or both". See also Section 2311,2314 and 2320 for additional fines and sanctions. Among the securities defined at alleged valid 18 USC §2311 is included "evidence of indebtedness" which, in a broad sense, may mean anything that is due and owing which would include a duty, obligation or right of action.

The above referenced documents qualify as "counterfeited securities" in that they have been officially signed and sealed as valid claims of a duty, obligation or right of action owed by Shane Christopher Buczek to the United States of America by the following: (l) True bill of indictment in cases; (2) Judgment in bank fraud case No 09-CR-121-S., and plea agreement(s) in cases #09-CR-141-S and # 09-CR-054-S (3) Orders by Judge William M. Skretny. All the above referenced documents are counterfeit securities because they do not evidence both the valid criminal statutes(s) and the enforcement regulation(s) as required by law. Furthermore, the above referenced documents are counterfeit securities because there was not a proper Constitutionally seated quorum 218 members of Congress when the USC Title 18, Public Law 80-772 was allegedly passed. In addition, USC Title 18, Public Law 80-772 was not placed into the Federal Registry for 30 days as required by law. It is in violation of the Federal Registry Act and The Administrative Procedures Act.

Congress has enacted five specific mandatory protections to prevent the unlawful imposition of the criminal code upon non-regulated activities, to wit: the Regulation must enforce (put into force) the specific statute of the Department of Justice. Since regulations may be directive (voluntary) or mandatory, the CFR Parallel Table of Authorities lists the enforcement (mandatory) federal regulation; all others are directory and may be ignored.

4

Title 5 USC 552(a) "Privacy Act Notice" states as follows: "Our legal right to ask for information is the Department of Justice and their regulation ... and whether your response is voluntary (directory) or mandatory under the law." (Emphasis added)

That body of law which codifies all federal laws including income, estate, stamp, gift, excise, taxes, bank fraud, etc. Such laws comprise the alleged Title 18 United States Code, and should have been implemented by the Code of Federal Regulations and are therefore void for a lack of implementation.

Pursuant to the Department of Justice "regulations for the enforcement of this title", and in the case of Shane Christopher Buczek, DOJ has no authority of law, which would allow them to place into evidence an "indictment" Form, pursuant to alleged valid USC Tile 18. This procedure is only allowed under the federal criminal law procedure where there exists a contract and registration by application for the special privilege of being allowed to operate in that jurisdiction, and therefore a judgment procedure is allowed. If one checks the manuals from the government printing office you will find under Title 18 CFR, "Federal Regulations" that!!Q!!!: exists. See ... cite; United States v. Mersky 361 US 431; Hotch v. United States, 212 F.2d 280,283, This cannot be mixed with any other matters of procedure because that would make law "arbitrary and capricious".

Perhaps this point is more strongly made in California Banker's Assoc. v Schultz, 416 US 21; 38 L.Ed. 2d 820, where the government argued: "We think it important to note that the Act's civil and criminal penalties attached only violation of regulations promulgated by the Secretary: if the Secretary were to do nothing, the Act itself would impose no penalties on anyone. And at 830 L. Ed. 2d: " ... the actual implementation of the statute by the Department of Justice Regulation. The Government urges that since only those who violate these regulations may incur civil or criminal penalties, it is the actual regulations issued by the Department of Justice, and not the broad authorizing language of the statute, which are to be tested against the Fourth Amendment; and that when so tested they are not valid."

In order for the statute to be valid, it has to have the corresponding federal regulations supporting it. It is required by law among other things that a law passed by Congress must appear in the Federal Registry for 30 days in order for the Public to make comments about it and or redress any grievances they may have about said law to their government. In addition, the law after passage thereafter becomes codified with supporting regulations called the Code of Federal Regulations. "Once promulgated, these regulations, called for by the statute itself, have the force of law, and violations thereof incur criminal prosecutions, just as if all the details had been incorporated into the congressional language." "The result is that neither the statute nor the regulations are complete without the other, and only together do they have any force. In effect, therefore, the construction of one necessarily involves the construction of the other." [Emp. added] 361 US 431 United States v. Mersky, 80 S.Ct. 459,4 L.Ed.2d 423

Without either of these Two Constitutional steps, ie: (1) the placing of the passed law into the Federal Registry for 30 days and (2) after its passage the law becomes codified with supporting regulations called the Code of Federal Regulations, the Act or Law becomes void on its face. Additionally, as the Supreme Ct. stated above in the Mersky case, there is the necessity of having both the statute and the regulation and only together do they have any legal force or effect. In the

5

instant case, there is an absence of Title 18, Public Law 80-772; being placed into the Federal Registry and the Constitutionally mandated supported Code of Federal Regulations undergirding the statute. As stated in the paragraph below, the court in Hotch. V. United States, 212 F.2d

280, 283 declares that, ... "if the rule itself is not published, it follows that it has not been issued; and if a rule has not been issued, it has no force as law."

Also, there is a further constructive fraud being perpetrated against Petitioner in that USC Title 18 has never been put into Federal Registry for 30 days as required by law and is therefore in violation the Federal Registry Act and The Administrative Procedures Act. Thusly, Title 18, section 1344, nor its penalty provision section, 3231 is valid, as the government and court lack subject matter jurisdiction against Petitioner.

Additionally, USC Title 18, Public Law 80-772 has never been properly ratified by a Constitutionally seated quorum furthering the lack of subject matter jurisdiction over said Petitioner. (See below attached letter from the Head of Bureau of Prisons, Harley G. Lappin Letter)

From: "Harley G. Lappin" <harley.lappin@usdoj.gov> Page 1 of 1

Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 3: 17 PM

Attention all Department Heads, there has been a large volume of inmate Requests for Administrative Remedies questioning the validity of the Bureau's authority to hold or classify them under 18 U.S.C. §§ 4081, et seq., (1948). On the claim that Public Law 80-172 was never passed or signed in the presence of a Quorum or Majority of both Houses of Congress as required by Article I, § 5, Clause 1 of the Constitution. Although most courts have, thusfar, relied on Field v. Clark, 143 U.S. 649(1892) to avoid ruling on the merits of these claims, however, there have been some which have stated that they were not bound by the Field case, but those cases did not involve any Quorum Clause challenge. So out of an abundance of caution, I contacted the Office of Legal, Counsel, the National Archives and the Clerk of the House of Representatives to learn that there is

no record of any quorum being present during the May 12, 1947 vote on the H.R. 3190 Bill in tlie House (See 93 Cong.Rec. 5049), and the record is not clear as to whether there was any Senate vote on the H.R. 3190 Bill during any session of the 80th Congress. There is only one Supreme Court case that says in order for any bill to be valid the Journals of both Houses must show that it was passed in the presence of a Quorum. See United States v. Ballin, Joseph &Co., 144 U.S. 1,3 (1892). The Clerk of the House states that the May 12,1947 vote was a 'voice vote,' but the Parliamentarian of the House states that a voice vote is only valid when the Journal shows that a quorum is present and that it's unlawful for the Speaker of the House to sign any enrolled bill in the absence of a quorum. On May 12,1947, a presence of218 Members in the hall of the House was required to be entered on the Journal in order for the 44 Member 38 to 6 voice vote to be legal. It appears that the 1909 version of the Federal Criminal Code has never been repealed. Therefore, in essence, our only true authority is derived from the 1948 predecessor to Public Law 80-772. "Although adjudication of the constitutionality of congressional enactments has generally been thought to be beyond the jurisdiction of federal administrative agencies, this rule is not mandatory," according to the Supreme Court in the case of

6

Thunder Basin Coal Co. v. Reich, 510 U.S. 200, 215 (1994). Therefore, the Bureau under the advise of the Legal Counsel feels that it is in the best interest of public safety to continue addressing all of these Administrative Remedy Requests by stating that only the Congress or courts can repeal or declare a federal statute unconstitutional.

~~.~

Harley G. Lappin Director, Federal Bureau of Prisons

As you can see from the letter above from the head of the BOP, there was not a proper Constitutionally seated quorum of Congress that made Title 18, Public Law 80-772 and its connecting sections valid. This is Prima Facie evidence from the governments own research arm and departments that Title 18, Public Law 80-772 is wholly unconstitutional. This further proves that there is a constructive Fraud being perpetrated on said Petitioner and underlines the fact that the above orders and indictments are counterfeit securities and therefore void of any force or effect of law, There is therefore no subject matter jurisdiction of this court over Petitioner Buczek. Where a court and its actors lack subject matter jurisdiction in a case, their cloak of immunities do not attach and therefore they may be subject to civil and/or criminal penalties.

It is obvious that the whole action in the case of United States of America and AUSA Anthony Bruce and Mary C. Baumgarten vs. Shane Christopher Buczek Respondent is predicated upon the use of the statute in Department of Justice as stated on page 1 of the Counterfeit Security Petition to Enforce United States of America Indictments. Since the Federal Register 2008 CFR Index, Statute and CFR Table of Authorities shows that there is no Enforcement Regulations pursuant to Title 18 USC nor Judicial Proceedings Enforcement Regulations promulgated pursuant to the power and authority of27 CFR Part 70 (Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms), then it is clear that unless the acts and actions of the above named Government agents is predicated upon some material facts that show that Shane Christopher Buczek is engaged in criminal activities pursuant to 27 CFR Part 70, the acts and actions of the above named Government agents and officials are once again based upon false premises and Counterfeit Securities.

Shane Christopher Buczek is NOT engaged in criminal activities under 27 CFR Part 70 within reason and belief. Therefore, it is reasonable to presume that The indictment; the Declaration of AUSA Anthony Bruce, the Petition to enforce indictment; and the Judge's Orders are all Counterfeit Securities designed to perpetrate a constructive fraud upon Shane Christopher Buczek.

It is clear from the actions of the above named Government agents that they have acted above and beyond their scope of authority by placing into the public record unsubstantiated claims against Shane Christopher Buczek which they knew or should have known to be false because said claims were required by law to convey subject matter jurisdiction for the particular regulated activity that is being alleged to have created a duty, obligation or right of action to the United States of America.

7

The warrants signed by judge Skretny on (dates see above) are a fraud and counterfeit securities claimed to be issued under the authority of the Department of Justice. It does not list valid statutory or the regulatory CFR authority even though both are required by law to identify the particular regulated activity that Shane Christopher Buczek is alleged to be engaged in, thus the instrument is counterfeit.

The Affidavit signed by Scott Kawski and Barry Horton on 8/12/09 under penalty of perjury, and the actions and order thereafter are totally false and a constructive fraud since none of the information constitutes prime facie evidence unless the enforcement regulations that identify the particular type of activity being reported is also placed into evidence. There simply are no evidentiary facts here. Mr. Bruce has lied and perpetrated a constructive fraud under oath as he has not identified any regulated activity concerning Shane Christopher Buczek and his Petition is a counterfeit security.

The The Petition to Enforce bail violation signed by Mr. Kawski and Barry Horton on 8112/09 and presumed to be under oath is also totally false and a constructive fraud. Mr. Bruce has made a very feeble attempt to justify his actions by placing into evidence the indictment. This is a moot issue because it also requires the evidence of the CFR regulation for the particular type of criminal conduct which doesn't exit. Mr. Bruce's Petition therefore is a counterfeit security.

The judgment that may be signed by Judge William M. Skretny on 11/5/10 will also be a counterfeit security. The Judge knew because of the motions filed into the court by Petitioner that the indictment( s) did not contain both valid statutes and the valid regulations required by law to impose a duty or obligation upon Shane Christopher Buczek. The Judge also knew because of the motions filed into the court that USC Title 18, Public Law 80-772 was not a valid Act in that a proper Constitutional seated Quorum of Congress was not present in the alleged passing of the Act, thusly violating the Quorum Clause of the Constitution. The Judge also knew that USC Title 18, Public Law 80- 772 was not placed into the Federal Registry for 30 days and is void of the supporting CFR regulations to validate said Act. It would be impossible for Shane Christopher Buczek to prove he did not engage in some activity that is in interstate commerce when the Government and the above named Government agents have not alleged or produced evidence that Shane Christopher Buczek has engaged in interstate commerce activity under the statutes and CFR Regulations of 27 CFR Part 70 associated with Title 18 USC. One cannot prove a negative. It is the duty and obligation for the Government to produce evidence of a positive. Therefore, the judgment to be signed by the Judge is a counterfeit security in that Shane Christopher Buczek cannot be made to show how he violated Title 18, wherein the CFR regulations which do not exit, pursuant to the evidence and instruments before the court in actions 08-cr-054-s, 09-cr-121-s, 09-cr-141-s in the Western District of New York District Court.

The Petitioner, Buczek is also forced to commence a further suit dealing with the violations of Securities Fraud being committed by this court and is compelled by TITLE 18, § 4. Misprision of felony to report these crimes. It is a fact that this court is aware that all cases, etc., are being converted to securities to be bought and sold on the stock market (and other venues) by and through insurance companies, etc. Once the original security note, bond, mortgage or document(s) is sold into the markets the only evidence left is a copy of the original document.

8

Those "copies" are placed before the Administrative Courts by prosecutors and court officials are accepting these "copies" as a true/original document. The Administrative Courts and its officers know that these are "counterfeit" obligations and that forged and "counterfeit" documents are being placed before this Administrative Court in order to "re-monetize" them which is illegal. The real/original documents have already been placed into the securities exchange system for trade and commerce, and assigned CUSIP numbers (Federal Government Code, State code, County code, issuer, issue, check = Cusip Identifier). (See below Petitioners CUSIP numbers that have already been assigned and being traded in these 3 cases) CUSIP numbers regulate the selling of securities under the Securities Act. Once this is done the debt has been cleared and discharged. For any prosecutor or Administrative Office to re-introduce these same, now "counterfeit," securities before a court would be committing Fraud under 18 USC 471- 474(A). The penalties for these felony violations include up to 10-40 years in prison. [18 USC § 894(a) states: "Whoever knowingly participates in any way, or conspires to do so, in the use of any extortionate means (1) to collect or attempt to collect any extension of credit, or (2) to punish any person for the non repayment thereof, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both."] Also, these actions include the fraud of civil rights violations by bringing such claims (suits) "in fraud" just so these counterfeit securities can be traded. These actions are felonies and outright "securities fraud." There has been extortion and kidnapping of my credit and the engaging in monetary transactions in property derived from this unlawful activity. Having the enclosed "proof" that my credit was extorted and used without my knowledge or consent is like having the DNA trail lead right to the source, and in this case, the source is the Court, and all the government actors, AUSA's, various govt. agencies and the U.S. Attorney General. Eric Holder himself. This is also called stock market manipulation and violates all applicable "anti-trust" laws. It is also a fact that the converted "copies" of these securities by the courts also go through the State Comptroller and the Comptroller of Currency of the United States to disperse the funds once they go through the money laundering stage. Through this scheme, the Comptroller can now legally produce grant money to the government. This is this Petitioner's short version of a very long story. This applies on all cases including - IRS, MORTGAGES, CREDIT CARDS, CRIMINAL CASES, TRAFFIC TICKETS, CHILD SERVICES, ETC. The Petitioner, Buczek has given this court, through this filing, a number of ways to settle this dispute and has explained why the Administrative system has created a syntax, and statutory language, fraud on the people, and why the Administrative Court refuses to clarify any language. This is why the court returns rulings of "NOT WELL TAKEN" when a clarification of language document, such as a Petition or Motion, comes before any court.

Shane Christopher Buczek is not and has not intended to be a federal State citizen or Resident as set forth and defined in the Buck Act, Title 4 USC §§105-110. Shane Christopher Buczek does not support the federal international bankruptcy declared legislatively by HJR-192, passed by Congress in 1933 and declared judicially by the United States Supreme Court in Erie Railway v. Tompkins 1938. Shane Christopher Buczek does not support the federal 51 shadow States that have taken over the de jure state functions since the 1930's. Shane Christopher Buczek does not reside in nor has been a citizen or resident of the federal shadow State of New York. Shane Christopher Buczek does not live in the federal territory of the Western District of New York, a federal area created out of thin air by the Buck Act and other legislation that has usurped power and authority from de jure Government.

9

Before any agent of the United States or one of the federal 51 shadow States created to impersonate the 50 de jure states (See definitions in 31 CFR Part. 1, Sections 51.2 and 52.2) acts upon the declared status of Shane Christopher Buczek, Sui Juris, as that of a "non-resident alien" to the Corporate Federal "United States", such agent is directed to take Judicial Notice of St. Louis Park Medical Center v. Lethert, 286 F. Sup. 271 and 28 USC §2201.

All DOJ agents and United States Courts are thus barred from making a "status determination" with regard to federal statutes. Consequently, ifDOJ agents and Courts are barred from declaring Shane Christopher Buczek, Sui Juris, a "U.S. citizen", this is prima facie evidence that the federal statutes do not apply. Wherefore, both DOJ agents and United States Courts lack jurisdiction and the declared status of the Accused must be accepted.

Shane Christopher Buczek is not a "person" as defined in alleged valid Title 18 USC § 1344 as one upon whom the District Court has jurisdiction to bring an enforcement action and a judgment pursuant to alleged valid18 USC 1344 defines the term "Person" to include "an officer or employee of a corporation, or a member or employee of a partnership, who as such officer, employee, or member is under a duty to perform the act in respect of which the violation occurs". Shane Christopher Buczek has no nexus to any regulation shown in the counterfeit securities presented by the Government agents herein.

DEMAND is hereby made on you, Eric Holder Jr., United States Attorney General, to investigate the above named Government employees, officials, and agents for creating, using and promoting fraudulent and counterfeit securities in a fraudulent scheme in order to solicit Shane Christopher Buczek by duress and coercion into participating in a scheme to collect from him in excess than those authorized by law in violation of alleged valid Title 18 USC 1344, alleged valid Title 18 USC 401(f)(1), and for violating alleged valid Title 18 USC 1001(a)(2), alleged valid Title 18 1028(a)(4), alleged valid Title 1542; for damages caused by agents, officers, and employees acting recklessly and intentionally in excess of statutory provisions and regulatory provisions of the alleged valid Title 18 USC.

Further DEMAND is made, pursuant to Title 5 USC 552(a), for the production of the signed delegation of authority from the Attorney General of the of the United States which authorizes or sanctions the proceedings against me by the above named officers, agents and officials. Please send me a copy of the signed delegation of authority from you, the Attorney General of the United States or your delegate directing the action against me to be commenced.

The above demands are made pursuant to the statutes and regulations under alleged valid Title 18 USC and the other laws and statutes of the United States, including, but not limited to, the Uniform Commercial Code, §3-501.

Attorney General! I am sure that if I were suspected of counterfeiting the securities of the United States, a full battle dressed SWAT team would invade my private dwelling, kidnap me into United States federal jurisdiction, arrest me, and prosecute me to the full extent of the law. I hereby DEMAND that you honor your oath of office to defend and support the Constitution for the de jure united States of America (if you still are loyal to that entity). In so doing, I DEMAND that you investigate the illegal acts of the above named United States

10

agents, and cause to issue indictments and prosecute all suspected parties for the counterfeiting of the securities of the United States, pursuant to alleged valid Title18 USC §4 and alleged valid Title 18 USC §513; and also to investigate, indict, and prosecute all violations by the above named United States agents for violation of alleged valid Title 18 USC statutes concerning their attempts to collect from me in excess of those allowed by statute and regulation. In the alternative, if you are either unwilling or unable to investigate, indict, or prosecute the above named individuals, identify the lawful reasons why and relate said reasons to me in writing within 20 days from receipt of this letter. If you need longer than 20 days to respond, send me a request for an extension of time within the 20 days and it will be given to you. Failure to respond to this request timely and upon the merits of this demand and inquiry will be prima facie evidence that the United States Government and its agents, employees and officials are engaged in an ongoing constructive fraud against me to deprive me of my unalienable rights from God.

I, Shane Christopher Buczek, declare under penalties of perjury under the laws of these United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, is made in good faith and is admitted if not rebutted.

I certify that the facts stated herein are true and correct under the penalty of perjury as provided by 28 USC Section 1746, that I am over the age of 18, and that I have firsthand knowledge of the facts stated herein.

BY: ,oRU:Vh.{ "" shane-christopher: buczek as third party intervener and Grantor/Beneficiary for:

SHANE C. BUCZEK a US TRUST All rights reserved Without Prejudice Without recourse UCC 1-308

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED uee 1-308

In Trust

Exhibits Attached thereto:

(1) Counterfeit Security indictment AUSA Anthony Bruce See Case 08-cr-054,09-cr-121 and 09-cr-141.

(2) Counterfeit CUSIP Securities by Fidelity for all 3 cases enclosed

(3) Counterfeit Security Judge's Orders in document above

(4) Motions filed into District Court on Counterfeit Securities Fraud issues.

(5) Petition To Settle The Dispute and ORDER TO SETTLE THE ALLEGED DEBT

11

(6) JUDICIAL NOTICE TO DISMISS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS OF THE 5TH, 6TH, 14TH AMENDMENTS & DUE CLAUSE FRAUD UPON THE COURT COUNTERFEIT & FORGED SECURITIES VIOLATIONS COURT LACKS SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION FOR NUMEROUS REASONS ENUMERATED HEREIN

Please enter search criteria for the stock, mutual fund, index, or annuity you want to lookup:

Search for:

Mutual Fund

3. . I Security Name

by:

§earch

FIDELITY SELECT ELECTRONICS PT

316390863

8

This information is provided for information purposes only and should not be used or construed as an indicator of future performance, an offer to sell, a solicitation of an offer to buy, or a recommendation for any security. Fidelity can not guarantee the suitability or potential value of any particular investment.

©Copyright 1998-2008 FMR LLC.

All rights reserved.

Terms of Use.


I Mutual Fund Search for:

'";i I Security Name ..:J by:

§earch I Beset J

FIDELITY SELECT CONSUMER STAPLES

316390848

9


12



Terms of Use.

(1 HELP)


Security Name

Search for:

Mutual Fund

....

by:

_§earch

I 09-cr-00141

FIDELITY SELECT CONSUMER STAPLES

316390848

9




Terms of Use.

By way of service on a judicial filing in the United States District Court for the Western District of New York, Case Number 09-cr-141-s, 09-cr-121-s, 08-cr-054-s.

Copies to:

Petition To:

Commandant (G-OPL)

U. S. Coast Guard

2100 2nd St. SW Washington, DC 20593-0001

SEC Headquarters 100 F Street, NE Washington, DC 20549 (202)942-8088

IV1r-<,LL 7007 100001 3805

New York Regional Office

George S. Canellos, Regional Director 3 World Financial Center, Suite 400

13

10

u.s. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION,TORT BRANCH FEDERAL TORT CLAIM ACT STAFF

BOX 888 BENJAMIN FRANKLIN STATION WASHINGTON,D.C. 20044 0500

Universal Postal Union International Bureau Case postal

3000 BERNE 15

SWITZERLAND Tel.: +41 31 35031 11 Fax: +41313503110

REGISTERED MAIL RR 353 687385 US

Secretary Janet Napolitano Department of Homeland Security

U.S. Department of Homeland Security Washington, DC 20528

o

1

12

Pope Benedit XVI 00120 Vatican City State EUROPE

REGISTERED MAIL RR 353 687394 US

Investigator Walter Benson Kenneth May

Dianne Brennan

Joe Kelly

F.O.LA.

Depository Trust Company 55 Water Street

New York, New York 10041 Fax 212.855.8685

Phone 212.855.8698

1

Patricia D. Harris

F.O.I.A. /P.A. Section, Room 115 Loc

14

Justice Management Division U.S. Department of Justice

Constitution Avenue and Tenth Street NW Washington, D.C. 20530

Phone 301.436.1018

US First Class Mail

Eric Holder Jr.


950 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Washington, D. C. 20530

15

Trading Prisoners Like Cattle

The Redemption Service 5,318 VIEWS

November 7, 2008

RedemptionService.com

All crimes are commercial and have a commercial value to them. It makes you look at improvements to the freeways, ci ties and towns in a different light ... especially when those improvements are funded by

'municipa~ bonds.' You'll also understand why there's no hurry to end the war in Iraq.

All criminal prosecution is for the purpose for raising revenue for the United States. Now you'll have a better understanding of why people are in jail, why they are in prison, why they are on probation and why they are charged with everything from jaywalking on up through murder one.

An American soldier who dies in Afghanistan and Iraq probably carries a $10 million life insurance on him carried by the government. After all, every soldier, marine, or air force person is an asset to the United States. They have a huge investment in that particular soldier and his activity and it can explain why it is that the US is not so anxious to withdraw its troops from that area. It's a money making activity and they don't want to talk about the fact that they are making money on death and that they are making money from the incarceration and imprisonment of many otherwise good hearted people who have not necessarily committed otherwise serious crimes.

They have a rule called the 144 holder. The rule is that they can't sell private investment securities that are not registered. The rule prohibits them from

Page 1 of 11

selling the prison bonds. They have to wait 6 months before they can sell a certain quantity of private securities without being registered, selling them as private securities.

Basically there are 8 people on the board of directors of CCA (Corrections Corporation of America) The top holders are Joseph E. Russell and John M. Ferguson. Russell owns 64,000 shares of CCA stock, which is worth about $70 million. Ferguson owns 34,000 shares valued at about $37 million.

FideIity Management and Research is the top stock holder, the top investment firm that is selling the bonds as investment securities. They pool them and sell them as mortgage backed securities. Also when they pool them, they sell them as mutual funds on the stock market. By "pooling" we mean the securities on the inmates.

What they are doing is they are actually taking the mortgage backed securities, which are really bid bonds, performance bonds and payment bonds. They pool these bonds and when they pool them together they call them mortgage backed securities. They take these to TBA which is the Bond Market Association. It's an actual market for bonds. Anytime a bond is issued there has to be an underwriter. The bonds have to be underwritten. Bonds that are issued have to be indemnified so there has to be surety to indemnify the bonds. The brokerage houses and the insurance companies indemnify the bonds. They're called surety companies.

After the surety companies indemnify the bonds, which is underwriting them, they do this through an investment banker or the banks themseIves do this. They job it out to them. They buy up all these shares and turn around and sell them as investment securities. The shares represent the stock which represent the account

Page 2 of 11

of CCA. All of this has been funneled through CCA, the Corrections Corporation of America.

What they are doing is selling stock in the prison system by selling the prisoners' accounts as securities through the securities exchange. They are making huge amounts of money off it. They privatize the prisoners' accounts and bring all these investors in and what they are doing is underwriting all these prisoner's accounts

(bonds). This is after the surety company guarantees the bonds. Then they are underwritten through an investment bank or banker. Then they are put out on the market and resold to the public.

CHECK IT YOURSELF

Enter any prisoner's case number within the specified entry boxes, located at Fidelity Investments' online Securities look up index query, locate that prisoner's bonds and find out where they are being traded.

Example (with a court case number 05CR272 - this is the District Court Case Number) :

!r;#Sllir:1:itYlllhg, t'!'i!lCUSIPn1i~f ~fvr.dni~f

You will get a CUSIP number 316423102.

Page 3 of 11

See it being traded as a mutual fund through Fidelity Investments!

To make it clear to whom you have the honor, take a look at the Fidelity Investments logos:

In other words the banks are buying up all the shares and then they resell them as investment securities to the public. The public then buys them as mutual funds or they can buy them as debt instruments, equity instruments.

What they are really doing is they are buying up debt instruments. They are using the fiscal accounting cycle

Page 4 of 11

of accrual and they sell the prisoner's 'capital and interest' as it is called in accrual accounting. They resell these to the public because the prisoner did not do ru~~ sett~ement and c~osure on the account.

They sell the prisoner accounts as a commercial dishonor and sell it to the public as a commercial dishonor.

When you go in the courts they always say they are operating under a statute jurisdiction. The Black's Law Dictionary 4th edition says a statute is a bond or ob~igation or record. That's what all the criminal statutes are: bonds or ob~igation or record. Go in and read the definition of a recognizance bond and you find that it is a bond or obligation of record. They are selling bonds. They are charging prisoners under a bond; the prisoner signs the bond and the bond becomes the agreement for the payback. This is done when the prisoner signs the final court papers at a sentencing hearing.

Just how many of us remember when our government attempted to finance from the private sector during the Second World War? Weren't they selling war bonds? They were soaking up the people's equity in terms of buying bonds, transferring your funds to the government. The government by purchasing those bonds, was promising to pay you back your investment at sometime in the future with interest. At that time what they were collecting from the people was their so-called cash equity. People have gotten too poor, too stingy, too smart to buy bonds to finance the government.

How long has it been since you heard the Post Office or anyone trying to get you down to buy US savings bonds? So what they are doing now instead of getting us to voluntarily give our cash equity to the government for a promise to be paid back in the future, they are

Page 5 of 11

securing from us some violation of a statute by which the law ascribes from us a penalty; i.e., the payment of a sum of money due.

Instead of collecting the cash from us, they put us through a criminal procedure where we dishonor the system and what is happening is they are selling our capital and our interest. In other words, they are selling the liability you had in whatever charge was brought against your strawman.

They are taking that capital and interest that you should pay and are grabbing that from us and selling it on the open market to bankers and investors to transfer their funds to government which is covered by the bond of the violation of your strawman of that statute.

In order to secure the bond the living soul is placed in prison as the surety to back the bond which is financed on the investment of the public market place in terms of the sales of stocks and bonds.

The public doesn't directly bid on my (the prisoner's) debt. Your debt is assumed by the bankers. The bankers issue secondary paper that allows me to invest in what they are holding as the holder in due course of the claim against your strawman. The reason they are doing this is because you dishonored the post settlement procedures for settlement and closure of the account.

The prisoner should have come in and accepted and used his exemption. Since the prisoner dishonored the post settlement proceedings, then the prisoner is in dishonor and the issuance of the bonds by the financing system was done in order to pass the punishment on to him because of his inability to fulfill his post settlement objectives.

Page 6of11

If you get into dishonor by nonacceptance, what they are trying to do is get an acceptor which is the same thing as a banker. They need someone to payoff the obligation and if you get into dishonor, they sell your dishonor and put you into prison as the collateral and they sell the bond.

The bond is issued and they get a surety to underwrite the bid bond with a performance bond and then they get an underwriter to underwrite the performance and payment bonds.

What the performance bond does is it guarantees the bid contract, or the bid bond. What the bid bond does is guarantee the payment of the performance bond. This is done through a surety company. Then they get an underwriter or an investment banker to underwrite it. After it's underwritten, they sell it to the public as investment securities, debt instruments, or mutual backed securities.

It's all done through bonds ... bonding. That's what all these municipal bonds are. What they doing is following everything through the prison system. The prison system is being privatized. Through privatization, private enterprise can fund the prison system cheaper than the government can. They are subsidizing everything through privatization.

The American Legis~ative Exchange Counci~ (ALEC), promotes privatization through foundations like the Reason Foundation owned by David Knott. They get the foundations to promote this and get investors to come in.

Corne~~ was merged with Trinity Venture Company which is an investment company. What they did was change their name to Reid Trinity Venture and then merged with SB Warburg. (Warburg was out of Germany and partnered

Page 7 of 11

with Rothschild.} SB Warburg is in Chicago, Illinois, and they merged with BIF in Switzerland, which is a settlement and closure bank, and the biggest bank in the world for settlements. They are connected to Corne~~ Company which is owned by David Cornell.

Everyone is tied in. Paine Webber Group in the United States and all the big international corporations are the stockholders and own all the stock in CCA. Everyone is using our exemptions on the private side. They filed a 1096 tax return and show it as a prepaid account, as prepaid interest and they returned it back to the prisoner. They took the prisoners deduction for the exemption and they deduct the tax and the IRS bills the prisoner for the tax. So the corporations are stealing your exemption which is your intellectual property.

What's wrong with this? They are not telling us what they are doing. It's all commercial. When you go into the court room everything is commercial.

What really matters here is honor and dishonor. The courts have to dishonor the potential prisoner or get that 'person' to argue or get that person's attorney to argue. Just like Martha Stewart. Argue and you're in dishonor and you'll end up in jail.

The attorneys are actors to make us think the whole process is a factual issue. They get us into the guilty/not guilty mode and they get into all the cloak and dagger or what evidence to present. It's a dog and pony show to cover up that they are after the debt money.

All corporations work on a fiscal accounting year which means that they spend debt. They can't get rid of the debt and balance the books unless they run it through our accounts on the private side.

Page 8 of 11

We the people run on a calender year and the corporations run on the fiscal year. The on~y way that they can ba~ance their books is to run it through our accounts using our ex~tions. Then they can do their reverse bookkeeping entry and go to post settlement and closure. They can't do that until the prisoners do the acceptance (if they do it).

That what they are looking for in the court room under UCC 3-410 is the acceptor. That means we are assuming the liability for the debt as the principal. A lot of times with debt the principal is always the primary libelant in the commercial setting. He has to assume the liability and then you get your remedy. Otherwise you don't get a remedy.

What they do is they sell the notes just as they do when you go into prison. They endorse the note and they no longer the holder of the note. The mortgage company wasn't involved in this process ... the attorneys are doing all this. What they are doing is coming to the private side to get the debt without any permission from the mortgage company. In this case they quoted from the UCC, and it's from Lex Mercatoria, the Law or the Merchant.

Admiralty is all debt and it's all civil; it becomes criminal when the prisoner gets a contempt charge when he refuses to pay. They can keep you in jail until you pay the debt. The initial get out of jail bond releases you until you've successfully paid the debt. Warden comes from admiralty-warden of the sea. The warden is the warehouse man who is warehousing all the goods; he's the bailee. The commitment order is your bailment, your contract for the commitment of the goods. Then they put the goods in a warehouse and store them there. (Prisoners stored in prisons, just like the people

stored in the pods in the movie, The Matrix.)

Page 9 of 11

This fiction (corporation) took you (John Henry Doe) , the flesh and blood creation of God, out of the picture and substituted in your place something called the 'strawman' (JOHN HENRY DOE).

Whenever you get a summons to appear in court, your name is printed in all capital letters "JOHN HENRY DOE" because that is how the 'straw man' is distinguished :erom the :e~esh and b~ood "John Henry Doe", God-created man.

Since you show up and answer to your all-capital name (JOHN HENRY DOE) on the docket, the court accepts you (John Henry Doe) as the 'representative' of the straw

man (JOHN HENRY DOE) and proceeds to play the game with you. If you don't show up, they will still arrest you for failure to appear, because the state has already recognized you as the representative of the straw man - unless you learn how to break that connection (called a

'nexus') and take back your straw man from state 'ownership' .

It sounds complicated and you weren't told a thing about it in school (public school), but we did tell you it was a "deception", remember?

If you don't realize that you are 'owned' by the state, then consider this: whenever you go to a car dealer and buy a new car, the "deed" (from the manufacturer) of that car is sent by the car dealer to the Secretary of State of the state in which you live. It's recorded and then destroyed. You, in turn, are given a "title of certificate" by your state which says that you have a legal right to possess and use this car which is now "owned by the state" who received its deed. "Your" ownership of the car is an "illusion," the reality is that the state owns the car.

Page 10 of 11

Same for a marriage licence. You are asking the state to give you permission to become man and wife. By seeking out said marriage licence, you are affir.ming to the state that your are s~aves of the state ("chattel") and you recognize that the 'massah' has authority over you for such things, otherwise you wouldn't be asking for its 'permission' in the first place.

Page 11 of 11

Jud Not Eric Holder

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Jud Not Eric Holder

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Jud Not Eric Holder

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Honorable court of record

You might also like

Jud Not Eric Holder

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Jud Not Eric Holder

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Jud Not Eric Holder

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

﻿Honorable court of record

You might also like

Honorable court of record