IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CIVIL DIVISION

______________________________________________________________________________

CHRISTOPHER BURDGE
COMPLAINT
Plaintiff
42 U.S.C. § 1983 FOURTH AMENDMENT
v.
JURY TRIAL REQUESTED
CITY of SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA
BRIAN BENTON - Individual Capacity
MANNY ANON - Individual Capacity Case No. __________
PAUL E. CARLISLE - Individual Capacity
FRED JONES - Individual Capacity
CHRISTOPHER NUNN - Individual Capacity
KELLY DIXON - Individual Capacity
BOB MCPARTIAN - Individual Capacity
BILL JURSIK - Individual Capacity
ED DODD - Individual Capacity

Defendants
_____________________________________________________________________________

CAUSE OF ACTION
1. This case is brought before this Court and against the 10 listed Defendants who acting in

collusion knowingly and willfully through deceit and deception used false documents and false

delineations of city limit boundaries to control and manipulate the general public and city

employees that created an atmosphere of lawlessness ingrained in its employees causing

violation of Florida Statutes that deprived Plaintiff of his “liberty, property, privacy, and a

personal sense of security and individual dignity” (10th Circuit Court of Appeals), with reckless
and callous indifference to both short term and long-term harm inflicted on Plaintiff resulting in

the violation of Plaintiffs Constitutional Rights protected by the Fourth Amendment to the

United States Constitution under Title 42 Section 1983 of the U.S. Code. (See U.S. Supreme

Court rulings paragraphs 65 -70).

2. This action is filed with the Court for Compensatory Damages against all 9 Defendants as

individual persons, Jointly and Severely in their Individual Capacity of ONE HUNDRED

THOUSAND DOLLARS ($100,000) each and Punitive Damages against each of the 9

individual Defendants of FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000) each.

Compensatory Damages against City of Sebastian, Florida for ONE MILLION DOLLARS

($1,000,000). Punitive damages are not allowed against the City pursuant to U.S. Supreme Court

rulings.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

3. This is an action at law pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for deprivation under color of state law

of rights, privileges, and immunities secured by the Fourth Amendment of the United States

Constitution.

4. This Court has Jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 1343 based on 42 U.S.C. §1983

and questions of federal constitutional law.

5. The Court may award attorney’s fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b).

6. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) because this is the District in

which all the events or omissions giving rise to Plaintiff’s claims occurred; and pursuant to 28

U.S.C. §1391(c) because all Defendants reside within this District.

 PARTIES
7. PLAINTIFF: CHRISTOPHER BURDGE, hereafter called PLAINTIFF is a former U.S. Navy

Diver, Special Weapons Expert, Torpedoman, SS Diesel Submarines in covert operations in Asia

during the last 4 years of Vietnam. A world traveler doing investigations for private individuals,

former Commercial Diver with degrees in Air Mixed Gas Diving and Bell Diving and an active

Geologist for over 40 years with a Geology Degree from a major university. Plaintiff grew up in

Florida in the 1950’s and 60’s working on fishing boats from age 10 and scuba tank diving in

various capacities by age 16 for additional income during the slower fishing months of the

summer. He returned recently to Sebastian once again to make it his long-term home and run a

new technology investment company as CEO for a group of private investors beginning in 2024

while he writes his historical/fiction trilogy novel of life on the Florida coast from 1715 to the

present as seen through the lives of a family linage. Because of the Constitutional deprivations

Plaintiff has endured as shown in this case he will under the laws of Florida create a non-profit

corporation called "Sebastian Florida Government Crimes" in 2024 to expose all crime and

corruption in Sebastian City Government and its employees past, present and future. After

careful investigation and analysis, all information will be published on the non-profits website so

that the citizens of Sebastian and the state, national and international tourist industry will

understand the true nature of becoming involved in Sebastian.

8. DEFENDANT: CITY of SEBASTIAN FLORIDA, hereafter called DEFENDANT CITY is a

corporate city formed under the laws of Florida in 1923. Defendant City governing body is

comprised of 5 city council members one of which is the mayor.

9. DEFENDANT: BRIAN BENTON, Director of Leisure Services for the City of Sebastian

Florida, hereafter called DEFENDANT BENTON mission statement is to improve our resident’s

quality of life while providing opportunities to improve their physical, mental and social well-

being as they enjoy our parks and facilities while contributing to the economic and

environmental sustainability of Sebastian.

10. DEFENDANT: PAUL E. CARLISLE, City Manager of the City of Sebastian Florida,

hereafter called DEFENDANT CARLISLE provides general guidance and management to City

departments, executes Council policy, coordinates cost savings and efficiency measures and

prepares the annual budget.

11. DEFENDANT: MANNY ANON, Former City Attorney for City of Sebastian Florida,

(removed from office on 2/3/2023 the day after stolen kayak was returned), hereafter called

DEFENDANT ANON represented the City of Sebastian in various judicial and administrative

proceedings, advises and performs legal work for the city's charter officers, city departments, and

the city's appointed boards. The city attorney attends all meetings of the City Council, Planning

and Zoning and Code Enforcement Boards.

12. DEFENDANT: FRED JONES, Mayor of the City of Sebastian Florida, hereafter called

DEFENDANT JONES.

13. DEFENDANT: CHRISTOPHER NUNN, Vice Mayor City of Sebastian Florida, hereafter

called DEFENDANT NUNN.

14. DEFENDANT: KELLY DIXON, City Council Member of City of Sebastian Florida,

hereafter called DEFENDANT DIXON.

15. DEFENDANT: BOB MCPARTIAN, City Council Member of City of Sebastian Florida,

hereafter called DEFENDANT MCPARTIAN.

16. DEFENDANT: BILL JURSIK, Police Officer of City of Sebastian Florida, hereafter called

DEFENDANT JURSIK.

17. DEFENDANT: ED DODD, City Council Member of City of Sebastian Florida, hereafter

called DEFENDANT DODD.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
18. Plaintiff remembers well the cartoon movie "Animal Farm" shown in his senior class in

1971 "Americanism v. Communism" (required for graduation) where the government officials

altered the words in original documents and blatantly posted them to subvert the rights of the

people assuming no one would protest. In today’s world few people stand up for their

Constitutional Rights out of fear, intimidation and ultimately retribution by the government at all

levels. The general public over Plaintiffs life time have increasingly lived in fear and just want to

get along with their lives in the easiest way which means never confront the government or its

officials and accept whatever corruption and abuse is handed out.

19. After 4 years in covert operations in Asia and all the years after in his travels overseas,

Plaintiff learned full well the subversive tactics of governments and other organizations that have

been infiltrated by individuals that subvert the rights of people to implement their own form of

Communistic ideologies in the name of Capitalism for the betterment of the people through

control and manipulation as depicted in George Orwell’s book, “Animal Farm.”

20. The city government of Sebastian like many of the coastal towns before want to attract the

big dollars of tourism and yet pretend that they are keeping to the roots of the “Old Florida” life
style that made Sebastian and towns like it on the River a unique and wonderful place to live and

grow up in the way Plaintiff did in the 1950’s and 60’s in Martin County, south of Sebastian.

Those that run the government today are outsiders that have invaded and have no sense of the

history of what life was like on the River and Atlantic Ocean nor do they care. They want money

to expand government and they will do it at whatever the cost. The cost is destroying the very

heritage, locations and types of people that made towns like Sebastian in the past much like the

fictional town of “Mayberry” from the Andy Griffith Show (1960-68).

21. The coastal towns like Sebastian were settled by independent tough men who endured at

times extreme hardship and loss and not the “white shoe” boys of today that have taken over

Sebastian City Hall. These pioneers were “Waterman” who made their living commercial and

sport fishing from the very early 1900’s, Plaintiff knows as he grew up on the docks around them

and in later years worked for them on their boats.

22. The city government of Sebastian has for years systematically sanitized the Sebastian

waterfront to make it look like the "Magic Kingdom" in Disney World by destroying historic

buildings and water front establishments that if the walls and docks could speak they would

speak volumes. This sanitized version of the new Sebastian is what the "white shoe" boys in city

hall have come up with to pull in more tourist money and expand their control. Their problem is

they can destroy the historic buildings on the waterfront but the “Old Florida” life style still lives

on in men like Plaintiff and the others on the River.

23. The “white shoe” boys at city hall cannot have these old relics that take away from the

Disney World "Magic Kingdom" atmosphere so they use the proven Communism models of

control by creating false documents, altering old ones, theft, harassment and intimidation to get

rid of those who want to live the “Old Florida” lifestyle like previous generations.
24. The fraudulent city limit map of Sebastian is a textbook example of this as presented in this

case as well as the legal property deed document used to try and implicate to Plaintiff and the

general public for many years that the city owns all the waterfront water bottom land all the way

out to the main channel. Using the “Animal Farm” tactics the City of Sebastian Government

makes up its own law ignoring state law and the resultant Constitutional deprivations against the

public. City employees just like the general public will accept such fraud even when they know

it to be true and some fewer undesirable employees will robustly enforce such fraud created by

their lawless Communistic Government so they can keep their jobs assuming no one will ever

catch them or stand up to them and if a man like Plaintiff does then in their demented minds they

can flaunt state law in the lawless atmosphere created by city hall. Coastal towns on the Indian

River have for decades tried to seize control of the River and waterfront owned by the State of

Florida and its people by fabricating fraudulent documents like the city limit map of Sebastian

and use fraudulent documents and fake city ordinances not enforceable under state law to coerce

and intimidate local residence into accepting the "Magic Kingdom" Communism version of what

is best for all the people. The Florida Legislature grew tired of such abuses and struck back with

its blatant statement in Chapter 327.60 Part (2) stating, “This chapter and chapter 328 do not

prevent the adoption of any ordinance or local regulation relating to operation of vessels, except

that a county or municipality may not enact, continue in effect, or enforce any ordinance or

local regulation.”

25. Over 50 years ago Plaintiff swore an oath to the United States Constitution to protect and

defend it against all enemies, foreign or domestic and he has always taken that oath seriously.

The 10 Defendants in this case acting in collusion will be shown to be nothing more than home

grown terrorist trying to instill Communism in Sebastian using terrorist tactics of theft,
vandalism, fraud and intimidation. Florida Statute 112.311 - Legislative intent and declaration of

policy Subpart (6) states, “It is declared to be the policy of the state that public officers and

employees, state and local, are agents of the people and hold their positions for the benefit of the

public. They are bound to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the State Constitution

and to perform efficiently and faithfully their duties under the laws of the federal, state, and local

governments. Such officers and employees are bound to observe, in their official acts, the highest

standards of ethics consistent with this code and the advisory opinions rendered with respect

hereto regardless of personal considerations, recognizing that promoting the public interest and

maintaining the respect of the people in their government must be of foremost concern.” The

behavior of all Defendants in this action spits in the face of this Florida Statute and the United

States Constitution.

26. Plaintiff grew up on the River in the 1950’s and 60’s and began working the fishing boats at

age 10 with his father and at age 16 was diving offshore commercially for sea shells and anchors

lost by fishermen during the winter months and covertly diving for golf balls at night in the large

golf course ponds with the snakes and gators and other critters to keep him company. This was

“Old Florida” and such Communistic behavior exhibited by the 10 Defendants would never have

been allowed. Plaintiff owes a duty to future generations and more importantly in memory of the

“Old Ones” from “Old Florida” who taught him life on the River and Atlantic coastal waters to

never allow such behavior to survive in his presence. "When injustice becomes law, rebellion

becomes duty.” Thomas Jefferson.

CASE & FACTS

27. THEFT OF KAYAK. During daylight hours on January 6, 2023 Plaintiffs blue one-person

kayak was stolen from the beach front south of the Main Street Boat Ramp in Sebastian Florida
where it was locked to a 30-inch-long screw anchor turn down screwed into the beach sand near

the River on Florida water bottom land under the jurisdiction of the State of Florida. After

recovering from the initial shock of the theft of Plaintiffs kayak he had just left locked up on the

beach that morning, he examined the crime scene and from the manner it was stolen it could only

point to the City of Sebastian. There was a small possibility that a desperate thief took it and if

that was the case they would have just cut the locks and cables and left the 30-inch-long anchor

turn down in the beach sand and left quickly.

28. POLICE REPORT. Plaintiff immediately filed a police report at the Sebastian Police Station

with Officer Antosia on January 6, 2023. Plaintiff raised the question of local government

involvement in this theft to which Officer Antosia quickly responded that it was not likely.

Officer Antosia showed no signs that he was involved or had any knowledge of the theft before

Plaintiff’s contact with him. The kayak was Plaintiffs daily transportation to his camp on one of

the Spoil Islands in the Indian River and the reason for his return to Sebastian again like 3 years

before, to relive his memorable years on the River he grew up on in the 1950’s and 60’s. With no

kayak and as it was then getting dark Plaintiff peddled his bicycle from the Sebastian Police

Station to the home of his best friend from high school 9 miles south of the station in Winter

Beach to regroup and sort out what happened and come up with a plan of action.

29. SWIMMING WITH THE SHARKS. After spending the night at his old friend’s home,

Plaintiff needed to get back to his old routine which meant back to his camp on the River island

each evening. With no kayak Plaintiff did what he was trained to do and did in the military as a

U.S. Navy Diver and as he had before and after the military in years of diving, he simply put on

a set of swim fins in the River and rolled over on his back and swam out to the island from a

beach head on the mainland of Sebastian while towing his day belongings in a large plastic bag.
Plaintiff did this for one week and then a problem arose of Bull Sharks in the River Plaintiff had

seen and been told about also schooling up south of Sebastian at the Wabasso Bridge and they

were reported as being hungry. Plaintiff in his diving career had unpleasant encounters with Bull

Sharks and one particular case he looked down the throat of the largest Bull Shark he had ever

seen as it was getting ready to end Plaintiff’s career, where in the last second, he fended it off

using his utility bag in hand.

30. Plaintiff decided it was time to get above the water line and returned to his old friends’ home

where he built a PVC kayak/raft deciding not to buy another real kayak until he knew what

happened to the stolen one. Plaintiffs instincts from a lifetime of investigations told him that it

was some degenerates in the city government that stole his previous kayak but if he was wrong

Plaintiff did not want to leave food for another thief and a PVC craft would not be a profitable

target. Plaintiffs normal routine before the kayak was stolen was to leave his simple island camp

by 5:30 AM in the morning and head for the beach area south of the Main Street Boat Ramp

where he chained it up to the 30-inch-long anchor turn down in the beach that was on Florida

water bottom land which is defined by the Florida Constitution and laws there under as all river

bottom land up to the High Mean Tide mark (See paragraphs 39 - 48). He would then change

clothes at the bathroom and collected his bike locked up nearby and head to either McDonalds or

Burger King on U.S. 1 for coffee and early morning work on his minicomputer in preparation for

the day of writing and research on the large computers at the Sebastian library. At the end of the

day about 1 hour before sunset he was back on the River again heading for the island camp.

31. For the week he swam in Plaintiff left the island shore at 5 AM because of the speed of

swimming was not that of the kayak and he changed locations to the commercial fishing dock

area where there were public bathrooms. Plaintiff locked his bike up to the railing for the
evening just outside the men’s room and after talking to some of the commercial fisherman there

(Plaintiff was one once many years before) they agreed to watch his bike at night for him. Every

morning during that week Plaintiff would run into “Martin” the elderly man (younger than

Plaintiff) who cleaned the waterfront bathrooms for the city in the early morning hours and who

Plaintiff knew from before at the Main Street bathrooms before his kayak was stolen. Martin

noticeably felt sorry for Plaintiff arriving in the early morning from the cold River and in the

then cold air temperatures where Plaintiff assured Martin of his survival and said to Martin, “life

is cold so, why should the water be different” and “this was the easy day” a motto from his

military days as a U.S. Navy Diver, meaning I will survive and it could always be worse

regardless of current conditions and events. For the following 2 weeks until his stolen kayak was

returned by Defendant Benton, Plaintiff kept to his normal routine but parked the PVC kayak in

a different location in the mangroves along the coast of Sebastian and waited for information

about his stolen kayak. From Plaintiffs experience in doing investigations it is just a matter of

time before people start to talk and the truth comes out and it finally did.

32. POSTED NOTICE. At the beginning of Plaintiffs swim week, he began his own

investigation and posted 5 printed signs (Exhibit A) around the boat ramp facilities requesting

information on the stolen kayak. Two signs were plasticized to the 2 table tops at the boat ramp,

one on each piling on either side of the ramp dock and one on the entrance pillar to the

bathrooms. The 2 signs on the table and the entrance pillar at the bathroom remained for 3 weeks

until the day after the stolen kayak was returned by Defendant Benton and Jursik when Plaintiff

only then removed the signs. It is illegal according to Sebastian City Ordinance to post any signs

on city property unless given prior permission which Plaintiff did not get as he wanted to see if

any employee would say anything especially the Leisure Services Department that has the
responsibility for the boat ramp area. After a week and no protest from the city or removal of the

signs Plaintiff knew it was employees of the city that were involved. It was impossible for

Leisure Services employees to avoid the signs as they were clear and in your face. Defendant

Benton of Leisure Services definitively stole Plaintiffs kayak and to remove the signs or contact

Plaintiff put Defendant Benton and Defendant City and all others involve in a Catch – 22

situation of the Fox having the keys to the chicken coop and either keeping them hidden or

exposing themselves as the thief by contacting Plaintiff. Plaintiff was contacted by a private

individual (who saw the notice signs) by email stating, “I had noticed the kayak there for some

time. One day I saw a white pickup, looked like the township trucks, backed up to it. After that it

was gone.”

33. THIEF SURFACES. With the knowledge from the informant that it was as expected the

City of Sebastian that stole the kayak Plaintiff sent a letter (Exhibit B) to all members of

Sebastian government via email on January 24, 2023. On January 25, 2023 at 10:39 AM,

Defendant Benton, Sebastian Leisure Services Director sent Plaintiff an email stating, “I would

like to setup a time to meet at the Main Street Boat Ramp area to get your kayak back to you and

also discuss the location that you have “anchored or attached” your kayak in the past. I am not

available after 2pm today but any time before then today or any time tomorrow works for me.

Please let me know if any of those times work for you or if another day is best.” Plaintiff

responded the same day at 10:55 AM stating, “First question is do you have my kayak and where

is your office at currently?” No response for the remainder of the day as Plaintiff expected as

Defendant Benton in Plaintiffs opinion was scurrying around trying to figure out what to do now

and talked to his boss Defendant Carlisle the City Manager for Sebastian and Sebastian City
Attorney Manny Anon (Defendant Anon), now that they had been caught in theft of private

property and the expanding cover up of this crime.

34. This was an indisputable theft as the kayak was anchored and chained (1 steel cable, 1 chain

and 4 locks) up to a 30-inch screw anchor turn down in the beach sand at the High Mean Tide

mark and not within the jurisdiction of the City of Sebastian. This kayak was also used 7 days a

week for Plaintiffs transportation back and forth to the Spoil Islands in the River. Plaintiff would

arrive at the boat ramp beach area with the kayak before dawn every morning and return every

afternoon just before sunset and leave with the kayak and back onto the River again. Defendant

Benton and other employees of Defendant City including the Sebastian Police could not possibly

miss this routine. Defendant Benton as Sebastian Leisure Services Director for the boat ramp

area is the most used location of any in Sebastian and under his patrol nor could they miss the 5

signs posted in the boat ramp area. If Plaintiff could see the city trucks in the area and even

observed Sebastian Police cars sitting directly behind the beach area where the kayak was

anchored and watching Plaintiff, then it was impossible for Defendant City employees to claim

they did not know the owner of the kayak which they stole especially when there were 5 posted

signs up giving Plaintiffs contact email.

35. At 3:58 PM on January 25, 2023 Defendant Benton sent Plaintiff an email stating, “My

office is located at City Hall, 1225 Main Street Sebastian, FL 32958. The City does have a blue

kayak in our possession. Please let me know if you are available tomorrow so that we could meet

and identify if the kayak is yours.” Plaintiff had not yet identified his stolen kayak and was

producing a Law Document (Exhibit C) to show in detail just what Florida Laws were violated

by the 10 Defendants acting in collusion in what was becoming evident was a harassment and

intimidation action by a bunch of fraternity high school mentality boys working for the city who
had to have gotten some approval from higher up and the atmosphere of lawlessness created by

Defendant City and those listed Defendants of city council and the mayor. Defendant Carlisle as

city manager has control and supervision of all aspects of city operations and Defendant Benton

would not have executed the theft (with others helping) without some sort of approval from

Defendant Carlisle. Plaintiff in his Law Document wanted to make sure that all levels of city

government knew about this so they could deal with Defendant Benton and others internally and

compensate Plaintiff for any loses so this theft could be resolved peacefully and to ensure such

behavior would not happen again. Plaintiff in every step of this violation of his Constitutional

Rights wanted Defendants to understand what they had done was both illegal and immoral and

for them to correct their actions and resolve this conflict before it escalated further into the courts

and public arena.

36. LAW DOCUMENT. The Law Document (Exhibit C) was sent to all levels of Sebastian

government from the Mayor on down via email including Defendant Benton and Defendant

Carlisle on January 28, 2023. The pre-letter statement that accompanied the law review showed

just how angry and resentful Plaintiff was and that this violation would not just go away as all 10

Defendants hoped it would if they just ignored Plaintiff which only intensified the abuses

Plaintiff had already endured. Not one word came from Defendant Carlisle who was city

manager and Defendant Benton’s direct supervisor nor from Defendant Anon the city attorney

who had to either have ordered the kayak theft or approved it. Defendant City along with the

mayor and city council and city attorney just hid in City Hall and all stuck their heads in the sand

of their communal sand box at city hall.

37. DEMAND FOR RESOLUTION. On Monday January 30, 2023 Plaintiff with no response

regarding Plaintiff’s Law Document (Exhibit C) sent on January 28, 2023, Plaintiff sent to all
afore referenced individuals a Demand for Resolution Document (Exhibit D) that was tailored to

the degree which if the people involved were not sinister characters they would jump at it so

peace could be restored in Sebastian. This offer was a test and if all 10 Defendants accepted it to

the letter then Plaintiff would have graciously backed his conditions and the issue would have

been resolved then. Plaintiff needed to know just what evil intent lingered in Sebastian as his

future home and place of business and he was willing to forget all the hardship and violations of

his rights that followed the theft of his kayak if those involved in Plaintiffs mind saw the event as

just a fluke or accidental event where all the Defendants understood the damage and Plaintiff felt

sure this would not happen again to him or another person. No response from anyone except city

attorney Anon regarding the offer (Exbibit D).

38. THE COVER UP STORY BEGINS. On Monday January 30, 2023 Sebastian City Attorney

Anon (Defendant Anon) in his email states, “Sir I am in receipt of your January 28, 2023 email;

however, with all due respect, I am not going to engage you in any argument you want to make

or are alleging against the city at this time. All I am trying to do is to secure the return of an

abandon property (kayak) which was improperly anchored on City of Sebastian property.

Since January 25, 2023, Mr. Bryan Benton has been attempting to meet with you in order to

secure the abandon property. So far, you have refused to meet to secure this property. So I will

attempt one more time.” This was the first acknowledgement from any of the Defendants as to

why Plaintiffs kayak was stolen which the law presented now in Florida River Law will be

reviewed showing that Plaintiffs kayak was anchored on Florida water bottom land and not City

of Sebastian property as Defendant Anon concocted.

39. FLORIDA RIVER LAW. Sebastian City Attorney Anon (Defendant Anon) had clearly

classified the reason for the theft of Plaintiffs kayak was that it was “abandon property (kayak)
which was improperly anchored on City of Sebastian property.” Property boundary lines on the

Intracoastal Waterway a.k.a. Indian River (hereafter called River) are defined by Article 10

Section 11 of the Florida Constitution and Florida Statutes thereunder and Common Law.

40. Florida Constitution- Article 10 Section 11 of the Florida Constitution states, “Section

11: Sovereignty Lands; The title to lands under navigable waters, within the boundaries of the

state, which have not been alienated, including beaches below mean high water lines, is held by

the state, by virtue of its sovereignty, in trust for all the people. Sale of such lands may be

authorized by law, but only when in the public interest. Private use of portions of such lands may

be authorized by law, but only when not contrary to the public interest”

41. Florida Statute - Chapter 327.02 Part (15) Definitions of Florida Statutes identifies Florida’s

state water right lands called the “Florida Intracoastal Waterway” a.k.a. Indian River (hereafter

called River) which the City of Sebastian borders on. The City of Sebastian’s entire eastern side

borders on the Intracoastal Waterway (River) and the State of Florida owns all beaches and

bottom water land from the High Mean Tide mark and outward unless such water bottom land

has been transferred by property deed. It is indisputable that all beaches and submerged land

called river bottom land below the High Mean Tide mark is the property of the State of Florida

for the enjoyment of the people. The City of Sebastian’s entire coast line borders on the River is

under the control and jurisdiction of the State of Florida unless the state cedes certain portions

thereof to Sebastian. Local city and county governments have for decades been trying to snatch

pieces of the water bottom lands away via the courts and in response the Florida Legislature has

retaliated with even harsher more definitive definitions regarding the rights of the people of

Florida as opposed to greedy townships that border the River in their attempt to destroy the “Old
Florida” that Plaintiff grew up in the 1950’s and 60’s before leaving for the military during the

Vietnam War period (See Preliminary Statement).

42. Florida Legislators contempt for such greedy controlling townships shows up in Florida

Statute Chapter 327.60 Local regulations; limitations. Chapter 327.60 Part (1) states, “The

provisions of this chapter and chapter 328 shall govern the operation, equipment, and all other

matters relating thereto whenever any vessel shall be operated upon the waters of this state or

when any activity regulated hereby shall take place thereon.” This clearly shows that there is a

hands off to local governments unless explicit permission is granted by the State of Florida.

Chapter 327.60 Part (2) goes even further in the total slap down of the expanding arrogance of

townships on the River in stating, “This chapter and chapter 328 do not prevent the adoption of

any ordinance or local regulation relating to operation of vessels, except that a county or

municipality may not enact, continue in effect, or enforce any ordinance or local regulation.”

Subpart (2) (c) of Chapter 327.60 defines exactly where this statute is referring to is “(c)

Regulating any vessel upon the Florida Intracoastal Waterway.”

43. The Indian River a.k.a. Florida Intracoastal Waterway (River) has always been a hands-off

environment for the people to enjoy and in the old days transport cargo on in flat bottom shallow

draft steam boats before the days of rail traffic introduced by Henry Flagger. Mayors and city

councils and their attorney’s make up foolish laws and regulations without even consulting

Florida Statutes to see if they are caught at it and challenged and why the Florida Legislature

prompted by the Courts to put in such clauses as Chapter 327.60 Part (2) and Subpart (2) (c) of

Chapter 327.60 to reign in the insanity coming from local townships where Sebastian is the

poster child for such behavior. The city limit map (Exhibit E) is irrefutable proof that Defendant

City has committed fraud to try and deceive and manipulate not only the citizens and visitors to
Sebastian but also its employees into believing that Defendant City has jurisdiction and control

over the Florida water bottom land for the entire River front of Sebastian and all the way out to

the main channel (See paragraphs 61-63). Common folks without any real experience just get the

map flashed in front of them by officials or employees of the Defendant City (or see it posted on

line or news venues) and these people just bow their heads and say “yes master” you’re the boss.

44. Common Law for generations of those on the River has been well known and accepted that

to fill in any part of the River is illegal (trespassing on and theft of state land) unless such

submerged land was definable by survey markers of a shoreline land owner and such land now

submerged was washed away during some storm. Common Law has always been if your

property water front is washed away and the owner fails to reestablish such land in a restricted

time period then that land now under the High Mean Tide mark becomes the property of the

State of Florida. Plaintiff knows as he was involved in 2 such cases many years ago, one where

his father who lost 200 feet out into the River and 300 feet of shoreline frontage and the other

when Dr. E. Ray Roberts President of the Oceanographic Society in 1970-71 with Plaintiffs help

halted the filling in of the River by a real estate company.

45. The past 2 recent hurricanes in 2022 washed sand and top soil from the unprotected

waterfront to the south of the Sebastian Main Street Boat Ramp bathrooms where such sand and

topsoil filled in (cover up) the former River bottom land that was in line with the "pepper tree"

stump known to be at the High Mean Tide mark for many years. The storms not only eroded

back into valid land owned by the city they also dumped it onto the Indian River Lagoon water

bottom land (all water below Mean High Tide mark) that use to be washed over by the normal

high tides in pre-storm periods. In short, the City of Sebastian is in violation of illegally filling in

State of Florida water bottom land because they failed to clean up their mess and, in the process,
attacked Plaintiff for having his kayak anchored into the beach sand where it was perfectly legal

to do so as he had done in a total of 9 months before.

46. The defining line can clearly be seen by anyone (photo documents for this case) who knows

the River meaning grew up and worked it from decades ago. As a Geologist, Plaintiff could

easily see it in the erosion of the different soils and deposition process of shorelines. After the

second hurricane of 2022 Plaintiff moved his kayak from the "pepper tree" area where it had

been and was 3 years before, further to the south another 100 feet down the beach and away from

the extensive debris to where it was stolen by Defendant Benton and all other Defendants

working in collusion for Defendant City.

47. Three years ago, the High Mean Tide mark was the “pepper tree” stump and Plaintiffs kayak

chained to it was free floating at the Mean High Tide mark of the day. The "pepper tree" stump is

a confirmed marker point (not a surveyor point) as well as the high barnacle line on the pilings of

nearby docks. Barnacles do not grow where there is no water and a surveyor’s transit shot from

the highest barnacle level to anywhere else including the beach that has not been illegally filled

in gives an accurate depiction of where the real Mean High Tide mark is (See Supplemental High

Mean Tide). Any surveying marker found today below the natural High Mean Tide mark

regardless of when it was established is the property of the State of Florida unless such

ownership of water bottom land was transferred to the city or other individual in the past by

property deed (See paragraphs 54-60). Land now washed away and under the High Mean Tide

mark is the property of the State of Florida as water bottom land as sea level rose over the

decades and land owners failed to immediately reclaim their land.

48. There has been 1 foot (in vertical depth) of sand and topsoil washed down from the erosion

of the grass lawn area behind where Plaintiffs kayak was stolen that has covered over River

water bottom land during the 2 hurricanes in 2022 where Plaintiffs 30-inch-long anchor screw

turn down was firmly imbedded in this River water bottom land. The City of Sebastian has been

since at least the last hurricane(s) been trespassing on state water bottom land by allowing its

illegal soil and rocks dumped from above (city property) onto state water bottom land and no one

at city hall on down cares about especially their city attorney who would not engage in a legal

discussion with the Plaintiff who had his kayak stolen when it was on state land. All 10

Defendants acting in collusion in the theft of Plaintiffs kayak have no concept or concern about

state law or the history of the River or the Geology of the River or erosion and deposition of

shorelines which does not matters to them for the theft of the kayak was done because they want

to get rid of Plaintiff an undesirable in their view. This was a gross Constitutional violation of

Plaintiffs rights and the confirmation of this remains today and is documented in photos on the

same beach head just 120 feet further south of where Plaintiffs kayak was stolen (See paragraph

53). All water bottom lands pursuant to Florida Statute 253.12 - Title to tidal lands vested in

state, are controlled by the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund.

49. ABANDONED PROPERTY SCAM COVER UP. Sebastian City Attorney Manny Anon

(Defendant Anon) stated in his January 30, 2023 email that “abandon property (kayak) which

was improperly anchored on City of Sebastian property” (See paragraph 38). Florida Statute

705.101 defines abandoned personal property as items that: “Has no identifiable owner. Has

been disposed of on public property. Is either in poor, inoperative, or dismantled condition—or,

has “no apparent intrinsic value” to its true owner.” Plaintiffs kayak which has already been

proven to have been anchored on Florida State water bottom land which includes all beaches up
to the High Mean Tide mark where the City of Sebastian has no jurisdiction over. To show

this Court just what a concocted scam Defendant Anon acting in collusion with the 9 other

Defendants was trying to pull on Plaintiff, an analysis of the “abandoned property” scam is

needed in light of the definition in Florida Statute 705.101. Plaintiffs kayak was used 7 days a

week and twice each day in his commute back and forth to the island he camped on. The general

public would see Plaintiff every day even in the early morning hours but especially every

afternoon and many talked to him over the months about the River and the past regarding the

River and just who Plaintiff was. The City of Sebastian and its employees knew who Plaintiff

was and numerous times Plaintiff has seen the Sebastian Police and other city vehicles watch

Plaintiff as he went about his normal routine with the kayak and his bike at the boat ramp. The

now Chief of Police of Sebastian, Dan Acosta knows who Plaintiff is from previous contacts so

the “Has no identifiable owner” of Statute 705.101 is completely dispelled. “Has been disposed

of” is not possible as the kayak was securely anchored in beach sand by a 30-inch-long anchor

screw turn down on state land with no less than one chain and one steel cable and 4 locks which

Defendant Benton cut off all of them using bolt cutters. To assume that Plaintiffs kayak “Has

been disposed of” with such security measures in open site for all to see every day 7 days a week

is absolute insanity on the part of the person making such assertions. “Is either in poor,

inoperative, or dismantled condition” is also absurd as Plaintiffs kayak was used every day

twice each day and was in good sea worthy condition, fully equipped with Coast Guard

requirements and the paddle firmly locked to one of the securing chains along with the life

preserve to prevent local theft. The “or, has “no apparent intrinsic value” to its true owner” is

equally absurd in that the kayak had the highest intrinsic value to Plaintiff as his only mode of

transportation back and forth each day to his island camp on the River and why the 10
Defendants stole it to cut off Plaintiffs access to his camp that in their Communist methodology

(See Preliminary Statement) would drive Plaintiff out of Sebastian.

50. Florida Statute 705.102-Reporting lost or abandoned property states, “(1) Whenever any

person finds any lost or abandoned property, such person shall report the description and

location of the property to a law enforcement officer.” Even if in some delusional state of mind

Defendant Benton and his 9 accomplice Defendants acting in collusion had perceived Plaintiffs

kayak was “abandon property” they were required to report it to a law enforcement officer

which did not happen for the Sebastian Police knew who the kayak owner was and even after

Defendant Benton personally stole the kayak the Sebastian Police would be able to contact

Plaintiff from the police report he filed the day it was stolen. Furthermore, Florida Statute

705.103 states the required procedure which Defendant Benton and the other 9 accomplice

Defendants were required to do in order to legally remove “abandon property” from Sebastian

City land. If Defendant Benton and the 9 accomplice Defendants acting in collusion actually

believed that Plaintiffs kayak was on Sebastian City property and was actually abandoned under

the definition of abandoned property then Defendant Benton and his 9 partners in crime were not

allowed to remove the kayak under state law as such action required the actions of law

enforcement where a specific NOTICE be placed on the kayak for a period of 5 days. No such

notice exists. Plaintiff in an Open Records Law request on March 27, 2023 to Cathy Testa,

Records Specialist for the City of Sebastian stated “Does the city have a copy of any abandoned

property notice regarding the theft of my kayak on January 6, 2023 where such document was

executed from January 2, 2023 through January 6, 2023 pursuant to the requirements of Florida

Statute 705.103 Procedure for abandoned or lost property?” Cathy Testa responded on March

28, 2023 to say “The city does not have any abandoned property notice regarding your kayak.”
51. Florida Statute 705.103 Procedure for abandoned or lost property (2)(a)1. Whenever a
law enforcement officer ascertains that:
a. An article of lost or abandoned property other than a derelict vessel or a vessel declared a
public nuisance pursuant to s. 327.73(1)(aa) is present on public property and is of such nature
that it cannot be easily removed, the officer shall cause a notice to be placed upon such article in
substantially the following form:
NOTICE TO THE OWNER AND ALL PERSONS INTERESTED IN THE ATTACHED
PROPERTY. This property, to wit: (setting forth brief description) is unlawfully upon public
property known as (setting forth brief description of location) and must be removed within 5
days; otherwise, it will be removed and disposed of pursuant to chapter 705, Florida Statutes.
The owner will be liable for the costs of removal, storage, and publication of notice. Dated
this: (setting forth the date of posting of notice) , signed: (setting forth name, title, address,
and telephone number of law enforcement officer) .

52. In either case the 10 Defendants violated state law which led the violation of Plaintiffs

Constitutional Rights under the 4th Amendment. By stealing Plaintiffs kayak from state water

bottom land it was plain and simple theft. By stealing Plaintiffs kayak under their concocted

scam story that it was on Sebastian City property as “abandoned property” they committed

blatant fraud in that there is zero possibility that any sane person could define Plaintiffs kayak as

“abandoned property” under the standards of state law and the failure to post the 5-day Notice

meant it was just plain thievery. Furthermore, with such concocted fraud the 10 Defendants

violated Florida Statute 705.103 Procedure for abandoned or lost property (2)(a)1 in their

failure to post the required 5-day notice.

53. The irrefutable proof documented in photos that this was a directed attack against Plaintiff

by all 10 Defendants is just 120 feet south an on the same beach where Plaintiff kayak was stolen

is the true definition of abandoned property as defined in Florida Statutes. This exist today and

has been there the past 10-15 years as an old boat hull 18 feet long half buried in the sand and a

total wreck. It is completely over grown with weeds and vines but easily visible when standing

anywhere on the beach head south the Main Street Boat Ramp and is the poster child for

abandoned property and yet all 10 Defendants decided to steal Plaintiff kayak because it was
“abandoned property” on city property. Furthermore there is another kayak locked to the bushes

just north of the boat ramp and within the 150 foot exclusion zone for the boat ramp for any craft

to be moored as defined in state law and it was never touched by the 10 Defendant thieves and is

still there this 2nd day of May 2023. This was a deliberate and calculated attack on Plaintiffs

Constitutional Rights under the 4th Amendment of Plaintiffs right of “liberty, property, privacy,

and a person’s sense of security and individual dignity,” (10th Circuit Court of Appeals).

54. RETURN OF STOLEN KAYAK. With both the Law Document (Exhibit C) and the

Demand for Resolution Document (Exhibit D) served on all Defendants with no response,

Plaintiff requested the return of his stolen kayak to the same location it was stolen from by

Defendant Benton. The mythological "coup de gras" document came to light at the meeting on

the shoreline area at the Sebastian Main Street Boat Ramp on February 2, 2023 when Plaintiff’s

stolen kayak was returned with all the cut off locks and chain and cable and with stolen other

accessories missing. Defendant Benton was accompanied by Defendant Jursik. Plaintiff let both

Defendant Benton and Jursik ramble on about the document the city had but no one had ever

seen or read that proved ownership of the shoreline and river bottom out into the River.

55. Neither Defendant Benton nor Jursik could come up with the actual name of the document

and Defendant Jursik said it was some sort of lease going back to 1964 and both said they had no

idea and that this was just what they were told from people above them which apparently for the

2 Defendants was good enough for their right of kayak theft and vandalism and the violation of

Florida Statutes and Plaintiffs Constitutional Rights under the 4th Amendment in the process.

Defendant Benton even pulled out the tax map showing the yellow lines of the city owned

property going out into the River which Plaintiff glanced at but was not interested in because he

had seen it before and wanted the 2 Defendants to carry on with their story and avoid verbal
confrontation. The actual document they were referring to on the beach that afternoon was the

1965 transfer of property deed number 23972 (1573-31) transferring for the sum of $832.21, a

1.15-acre piece of River water bottom land from the Trustee of the Internal Improvement Fund

of the State of Florida to the City of Sebastian (Exhibit F). The Internal Improvement Fund of the

State of Florida is codified under Florida Statute 253.12 - Title to tidal lands vested in state as the

controlling government entity in Florida for the management of all water bottom land, spoil

islands and shorelines as defined under Article 10 Section 11 of the Florida Constitution.

56. All 10 Defendants knew that the claim of city attorney Defendant Anon that Plaintiffs kayak

was anchored on Sebastian City property was “abandoned property” was not going to work so

the property deed document was a desperate attempt by all 10 Defendants to cover up for their

criminal activity. This is why Defendant Benton and Jursik worked so hard in their tag team

efforts to schmooze Plaintiff into believing that all the land belonged to the City of Sebastian out

into the River of where Plaintiffs kayak was anchored so in their view it was on city property and

there for the taking. Neither Defendant Benton nor Jursik bother looking up the real boundaries

of this “coup de gras" property deed and just stole Plaintiffs kayak on January 6, 2023 that was

legally parked on state water bottom land and in the process chopped all the locks and cables up

apparently for the fun of it to teach Plaintiff a lesson on who rules the River. Had they actually

checked this property deed boundaries closely they would have found that Plaintiffs kayak was

just 3 feet south of the boundary line and it was anchored into state water bottom land and out of

the jurisdiction of the city.

57. Plaintiff knew where the boundary line for the property deed was because he had already

checked and why he had repositioned his kayak where it was after the last hurricane of 2022

blew through to make sure the city would not bother him which he also knew was going to
happen. The atmosphere in Sebastian had changed since his last stay here 3 years before and

Plaintiff of the “Old Florida” time period did not fit in to the “white shoe” boys (See Preliminary

Statement) new Disney World “Magic Kingdom” river front atmosphere that Sebastian was

turning into, and it was just when and not if the city mafia paid a visit to run Plaintiff off. NONE

of the Defendants in this case had the courage to peacefully confront Plaintiff face to face

regarding any issue or even leave a polite note on his kayak for a meeting or even obey the 5-day

notice requirement under Florida Statute 705.103. NO, they were just the typical goons working

for a corrupt government entity and stole Plaintiffs kayak cutting the locks and cable and chain

when he was gone for the day assuming they had legal immunity for their actions.

58. What these 2 characters did not know was that Plaintiff was trained to recognize all forms of

nuances and presentments of human nature from a potential enemy before either of them were

even born and why Plaintiff let them both in tag team fashion ramble on about them being good

guys and that they had nothing to hide and that they had never seen any type of corrupt activity

in the city government. These 2 characters were dirty and trying to save their jobs and keep

Plaintiff from figuring out that Defendant City and its 9 accomplice Defendants working in

collusion were the core of this corruption. Plaintiff silently found it amusing that during this

clown show at the beach as it went on that the city pickup truck backed up to the beach with

Plaintiffs kayak inside was actually straddling over the property deed boundary line and when

the kayak was placed on the beach where it was before it was stolen they placed it 3 feet outside

the deeded property. The tax assessors earth version map (Exhibit G) with the yellow lines going

out into the River that Defendant Benton had pulled out to show Plaintiff, which Plaintiff had

already seen before and why his kayak was positioned where it was, was some type of spoof
where they figured Plaintiff would not know and Plaintiff had to bite his tongue to keep from

laughing at the whole charade.

59. To let this all play out in the days following the return of the stolen kayak and to see just

how corrupt and how many others were involved Plaintiff called the property deed the “Gator

Hole” document in his first draft of the this suit which he published on a website to get more

information with the url for this site posted on a large sign on the infamous PVC kayak

(See paragraph 30) moored in the River just 25 feet off the shoreline of where his stolen kayak

use to be kept. Plaintiff went into great detail regarding the “Gator Hole” document just to see if

ANYONE would rebut his statements. No one ever did apparently too busy with their heads

stuck in the communal sandbox up at city hall hiding from reality. There was a “Gator Hole” as

Plaintiff said in the first draft and it was as he said where the current parking lot for the boat

trailers is now and it was a freshwater spring as stated before being now filled in and Plaintiff

knows because he was there in 1955 when Sebastian US 1 highway was just a narrow 2 lane road

with no stop lights. Plaintiffs' family was in Sebastian then when his father was looking for

riverfront property as a backup location for the large former pineapple plantation on the River his

father bought in 1950 in Martin County and where the family resided in case Martin County got

to regulated and civilized for his liking. Plaintiff had a photographic memory of shapes and

objects and places that seemed important as stated in the first draft since age 1 standing in his

crib where he memorize paintings on the wall and the texture of the wood walls, and the

memories never go away. Such "Gator Holes" were common and one existed just 100 yards

down River from where Plaintiff first played in the River at 3 years of age with his little rubber

mask he got from box tops of cereal boxes back in those days as he watched the resident 16-foot
gator come and go every 2 weeks from its hole into the River to feed on fish and stray dogs. This

is why Indian River Drive in Sebastian bows upward close to US 1 as it had to go around the

Gator Hole spring Plaintiff stood at and his father warned him to stay away from the waters edge.

60. All 10 Defendants knew they had been caught in the theft of the kayak after they had

received both the Law Document (Exhibit C) and the Demand for Resolution Document (Exhibit

D) sent to them by Plaintiff. Defendant Anon (city attorney) came up with the scheme of

declaring Plaintiffs kayak was anchored on city property and was considered to be “abandoned

property.” Defendant Anon obviously did not check state law regarding this and just threw this

concoction out in hopes Plaintiff would not know and then ran back to the communal sand box at

city hall and resumed his position next to the mayor and city council with their heads stuck in the

sand hoping Plaintiff would just go away once his kayak was returned. What the 10 Defendants

forgot in their coverup story was Florida Statute 705.103 Procedure for abandoned or lost

property (2)(a)1, that requires a 5-day notice to be securely posted on the kayak which never

happened (See paragraphs 49 - 53). Defendant Anon (city attorney) was no longer employed by

the City of Sebastian after February 2, 2023 the day the kayak was returned and in the normal

procedure of governments and other entities was apparently “thrown under the bus” as the saying

goes because of the kayak theft capper and his attempt to cover it up, the usual sacrifice method.

61. FRAUDULENT CITY LIMIT MAP. Plaintiff made an open records request to the City of

Sebastian for a map that had been officially approved by the mayor and city council of Sebastian

showing the exact boundary of the City of Sebastian. Cathy Testa, Records Specialist for the

City of Sebastian responded with this map (Exhibit E) on February 14, 2023 which clearly shows

the outright fraud perpetrated not only on the general public but also employees of the city who
had chosen not to question anything in order to keep their jobs. This map clearly shows the entire

shore line of the City of Sebastian all the way out to the main River channel about a half mile out

was in the city limits of Sebastian. State law already presented shows this to be a complete fraud.

People want to believe their government especially their local government would never be so

bold and corrupt as to present such a fraudulent map with the bright bold boundary lines of city

limits unless it was actually true. Very few if any of the general public examine in detail such

documents especially maps that have bold lines on them and ask questions and presume

(wrongly so) that their local government has integrity. This map then in the hands of employees

of the city empowers them to control and manipulate the rights of the people where no such

authority exists. Such documents are the most hideous ways of subverting the rights of the

people and comes right out of George Orwell’s book “Animal Farm” (See Preliminary

Statement) and why America today is in such turmoil.

62. When such a fraudulent city limits map is used in conjunction with a legitimate map as the

1.15-acre submerged land deed, where such land deed map is used as a lead into the legitimacy

of ownership of water bottom lands out into the River as depicted by the city limit map does by

Defendant City then the "Animal Farm" scenario of Communist form of government control can

be easily seen (See Preliminary Statement). Defendant Benton using the legitimate outline on the

1.15-acre submerged land map directly in front of the boat ramp was nothing more than setting

up Plaintiff like all the rest of the general public into believing that the city owns the rest of the

River as depicted on the fraudulent city map. The general public when handed such a document

as Defendant Benton did to Plaintiff on the beach when the stolen kayak was returned would

automatically conclude when comparing it with the fraudulent city limits maps with the same

bold boundary lines that City Defendant also owns all the River out to the main River channel.
This is the most basic tactic of control without conflict a Communist style government entity

uses by using one document of true origin to implicate the authenticity of a larger document

which is a total fraud. This is why Plaintiff near the end of the beach meeting on February 2,

2023 repeatedly asked both Defendants Benton and Jursik why was such an important document

not posted in the Sebastian City Ordinances regarding waterfront ordinances for the city as it was

a critical document the public should know about to prevent conflicts and also a key historical

document. The historical question is clear as stated in the Preliminary Statement, the "white

shoe" boys at city hall want to get rid of the history in exchange for their more profitable Disney

World "Magic Kingdom" version and why there is not at least a basic historical time marker with

a map of the submerged land on it posted at the location. To do so Defendant would have to put

in print and map version the truth that would give readers the time to think about this and

compare it with the fraudulent city limits map and formulate questions Defendant City does not

want to answer. So instead they send down the Abbott and Costello comedy team of Defendant

Benton and Jursik to the beach along with the property deed map which neither knew what it

meant (the boundaries of it) and do their show to schmooze Plaintiff over. As already stated

Plaintiffs knew the boundaries and instead did his own schmoozing beginning the following day

to just see how clueless and/or corrupt all 10 Defendants where when he related the property

deed to a “Gator Hole” in the past..

63. As Joseph Goebbels, Hitlers propaganda chief said, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep

repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” Keep the truth suppressed by displaying a

fraudulent city limit map and have city employees do the Abbott and Costello act when needed

and soon everyone will see it as fact. Contributing evidence of this con game is the question of

why does the City of Sebastian need to waste tax payer’s money on an expensive boat to patrol
the River when the city owns only 1.15 acres of submerged land (not the water above it which

the state owns) and this land is only waste deep. The use of the submerged bottom land property

deed map on February 2, 2023 was nothing more than a con game to cover up for the theft of

Plaintiffs kayak and as a lead in for the fraudulent city map that shows the city has it all out to

the main channel and why Florida Legislators put into statutes regarding the River that a city

could make up any law they want but they could not enforce such law (See paragraph 42).

64. On February 6, 2023 Plaintiff sent all Defendants his last and detail Summation Document

in that he would not tolerate such behavior and abuse and that his organization would be coming

after the city for as many years as it takes to rid it of such abuse fraud and arrogance. This

document (Exhibit H) speaks for itself as well as Plaintiffs Law Document in showing the anger

and resentment for the violation of Plaintiffs Constitutional Rights under the 4th Amendment he

had earned in the service of his country unlike many others who just inherit such rights. No

response was ever given to this document by any of the Defendants.

CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS FOURTH AMENDMENT

65. CITY OF SEBASTIAN FLORIDA HAS NO SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY. In 1978 the

Supreme Court ruled in Monell v. Dept. of Social Services of New York, 436 U.S. 658, 701

(1978) that Municipal entities can be liable where their “policies and practices” proximately

cause constitutional injuries. The liability may be (1) where an express policy exits or (2) a claim

may state that a, “widespread practice that, although not authorized by written law or express

municipal policy, is so permanent and well settled as to constitute custom or usage with the force

of law.” Defendant City’s fraudulent city limit map (See paragraphs 61-63) approved by the

governing body more than qualifies Defendant City under the Courts Monell case.
66. Under assertion (1) State law determines whether a particular person or entity is the "final

policy-making authority" (Jett v. Dallas Independent School District, 491 U.S. 701, 737 (1989)).

In regards to Defendant City in this case in hand the City Council and Mayor are the "final

policy-making authority." In City of St. Louis v. Prapotnik, 485 U.S. 112 (1988), the Court

stated, “When an official's discretionary decisions are constrained by policies not of that

official's making, those policies, rather than the subordinate's departures from them, are the

act of the municipality. Similarly, when a subordinate's decision is subject to review by the

municipality's authorized policymakers, they have retained the authority to measure the official's

conduct for conformance with their policies. If the authorized policymakers approve a

subordinate's decision and the basis for it, their ratification would be chargeable to the

municipality because their decision is final”. The fraudulent city limits map is a gross and

deliberate act of subversion of the rights of the people of Sebastian and all others to indoctrinate

in Communist fashion (See Preliminary Statement) the people into believing that the city

government of Sebastian has jurisdiction over the River contrary to Article 10 Section 11 of the

Florida Constitution and laws thereunder.

67. Under Assertion (2) a local government may be sued for deprivations caused by

"governmental 'custom' even though such a custom has not received formal approval through the

body's official decision-making channels" (Monell, 436 U.S. at 691). To establish a custom or

practice in the absence of a formal policy will usually require proof of repeated incidents

suggesting a pattern or practice. The existence of a widespread practice can be so permanent and

well-settled to constitute a custom or usage with the force of law. In Spell v. McDaniel, 824 F.2d

1380, 1387 (4th Cir. 1987) custom or usage has force of law as "widespread practice" when

"duration and frequency of the practices warrants a finding of either actual or constructive
knowledge by the governing body [or policymaker with responsibility for oversight and

supervision] that the practices have become customary among its employees". In this case in

hand Defendant City use of a fraudulent city limits map that was approved by the Sebastian City

Council and the use of such map is posted in Sebastian Government files as a legitimate

document for many years where all internet searches such as maps.google.com of Sebastian

shows the fraudulent outline of the city which influences many individuals more than meets

Assertion 2.

68. Even a single decision made by the "final policy making authority," such as the governing

body of a local government or one having the power to decide finally on its behalf, can constitute

a "policy" under Section 1983 (See Monell, 436 U.S. at 694-95. See also Pembaur v. City of

Cincinnati, 475 U.S. 469, 480 (1986). "Policy making" is defined as "a deliberate choice to

follow a course of action . . . from among various alternatives." Id. at 483). Sebastian City

Council and Mayor are the "final policy making authority" and made a “deliberate choice to

follow a course of action . . . from among various alternatives" and approved this fraudulent map

and allowed it to be used to manipulate the general public and employees of Sebastian that

ultimately caused the Constitutional deprivations under the 4th Amendment that Plaintiff

endured. This fraudulent city map limits created an atmosphere of lawlessness that has been

instilled in the employee Defendants that ALL the River bottom out to the main channel is under

their jurisdiction which resulted in the theft of Plaintiffs kayak and the resulting Constitutional

deprivations.

69. Supreme Court in Owen v. City of Independence, 445 U.S. 622 (1980) reversed and ruled

that granting a qualified or good faith immunity to a municipality was not compatible with

Section 1983's fundamental purpose of remedying violations of federal rights. In Owen v. City of
Independence, 445 U.S. 622 (1980), (quoting Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167, 172 (1961) stated,

“Moreover, § 1983 was intended not only to provide compensation to the victims of past abuses,

but to serve as a deterrent against future constitutional deprivations, as well. ... The knowledge

that a municipality will be liable for all of its injurious conduct, whether committed in good faith

or not, should create an incentive for officials who may harbor doubts about the lawfulness of

their intended actions to err on the side of protecting citizens’ constitutional rights.

Furthermore, the threat that damages might be levied against the city may encourage those in a

policymaking position to institute internal rules and programs designed to minimize the

likelihood of unintentional infringements on constitutional rights.” Defendant City created a

sense of lawlessness (fraudulent city limits maps) to flaunt state law removes any sovereign

immunity status as defined in aforementioned Court rulings.

70. DEFENDANTS – BENTON, ANON, CARLISLE, JONES, NUNN, DIXON, DODD,

MCPARTIAN AND JURSIK INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY. The U.S. Supreme Court in Scheuer

v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232 (1974); held that plaintiffs were not barred by the Eleventh

Amendment or other immunity doctrines from suing officials of a state alleging that they

deprived plaintiffs of federal rights under color of state law and seeking damages, when it was

clear that plaintiffs were seeking to impose individual and personal liability on the officials. This

action is filed with the Court for Compensatory Damages, (“any damage award available for a

Fourth-Amendment violation under 42 U.S.C. §1983 should be tailored to compensating losses

of liberty, property, privacy, and a person’s sense of security and individual dignity,” 10th

Circuit Court of Appeals) and Punitive Damages against Defendants in their Individual Capacity

as employees of the City of Sebastian Florida. In City of Newport v. Fact Concerts; 453 U.S.

247, 266–67, (1981); the Supreme Court held that “punitive damages by definition are not
intended to compensate the injured party, but rather to punish the tortfeasor whose wrongful

action was intentional or malicious, and to deter him and others from similar extreme conduct.”

In Smith v. Wade, 461 U.S. 30 (1983); the Supreme Court held that Section 1983 authorizes the

award of punitive damages against state or local officials in their individual capacity.

Specifically, the Supreme Court held that “[a] jury [is] permitted to assess punitive damages in

an action under Section 1983 when the defendant’s conduct is shown to be motivated by evil

motive or intent, or when it involves reckless or callous indifference to the federally protected

rights of others.”

COUNT 1 – 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Fourth Amendment Violation “person’s sense of security” as

defined by 10th Circuit Court of Appeals).

71. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 70 as though fully set forth herein.

72. The 10 Defendants in collusion did knowingly and willfully with callous disregard for

the “sense of security” of Plaintiff a 70-year-old Honorable Veteran from the Vietnam era when

Defendants stole Plaintiffs kayak which was his only safe transportation to his island camp on

the Spoil Islands in the Indian River. Plaintiffs shock the afternoon his kayak was stolen ended

his peaceful existence he had planned on in his return to Sebastian Florida. The shock of

standing over the spot where he had left his kayak in the morning and then after surveying the

evidence and possibilities of who did this led to only one real conclusion that it was some

employee of Defendant City in direct violation of Florida Statute Title XLVI - Crimes § 812.014

- Theft (See Count - 4) and Plaintiffs right to his “sense of security” guaranteed under the

4th Amendment. Plaintiff hoped it was just some radicle immature individual which the city

manager Defendant Carlisle or the Mayor and City Council (all Defendants in this case) would
swiftly deal with and that this was not the typical Communism tactics (See Preliminary

Statement) Plaintiff had seen all over the world in his life time of travel.

73. Three years before Plaintiff sent the Sebastian Police Department a brief letter of

introduction to say he would be returning again to Sebastian to enjoy the River like he did in the

1950's and 60's and would camp on the Spoil Islands and use a kayak for transport leaving his

bicycle locked up at the Main Street Boat Ramp at night. The now Chief of Police Dan Acosta

replied saying no problem and that he would have the night patrol keep an eye on his bike.

Plaintiff spent 6 idyllic months on the River and working on the computers in the Sebastian

library during the day as he has done in the recent first 3 months of his return and never had any

cross words or disputes with anyone either on the River or along the riverfront until his kayak

was stolen by the 10 Defendants in collusion in the atmosphere of lawlessness created by

Defendant City. Plaintiff had returned to Sebastian to live in peace and enjoy the simple lifestyle

he so loved in his youth which still appeared to exist in his visit 3 years before and other visits

before that over the years.

74. Sebastian had chained since his previous stay 3 years before from a quiet "Old Florida"

atmosphere that made Sebastian special to a now higher end tourist destination that attract more

money through the increasing array of bars and restaurants on the waterfront with booming

music and bands that could be heard across the River to attract the baby boomers and foreign

tourist dollars from outside. Plaintiff did not drink or hang around the bars and restaurants like

his fellow baby boomers that bring in much of the tax money for Sebastian Government coffers.

Plaintiff was a remnant of “Old Florida” and did not fit in and was seen as an undesirable in his

simple waterfront dress code and appearance wearing his old green ball cap with an American
flag on the front to honor those of his generation who came back in body bags or were left

behind in the jungle in a war they neither wanted nor understood. He was in city governments

eyes an old homeless man with little financial contributions to offer as a tourist and they needed

to get rid of him from the waterfront that Defendant City had been molding into a sanitized

Disney World "Main Street" show and the real reason behind the theft of Plaintiffs kayak in such

a lawless fashion (See Preliminary Statement). Take his kayak which left Plaintiff with no way to

get to his island camp and he has no choice but to leave with the presumption Plaintiff did not

have the capability to fight back against such lawless behavior.

75. Defendant City wants to draw in the tourist to the bars and restaurants on the water front for

the city’s tax revenues and having what appears at first glance is a non-contributing bum hanging

around with his kayak anchored into the beach on state lands and talking to people older than

Plaintiff when they ask about keeping their kayak on the beach because they could no longer

haul theirs around but still wanted to use them was not going to be tolerated by the Defendants.

Defendant City could not have the general public knowing the truth about the law of the River

and Plaintiffs kayak anchored legally on the beach head on state land had to be dealt with. The

theft of Plaintiffs kayak by the 10 Defendants acting in collusion was a deliberate attack on

Plaintiffs Constitutional right of “sense of security” (10th Circuit Court of Appeals). Plaintiff has

no sense of security now knowing such Communist tactics used by these 10 Defendants can

strike any time with their lawless behavior and not be held accountable for it. The theft of

Plaintiffs kayak and thereafter the hideous coverup by the 10 Defendants acting in collusion was

a deliberate attack on Plaintiffs right of “sense of security” (10th Circuit Court of Appeals).
COUNT 2 – 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Fourth Amendment Violation “individual dignity” as defined

by 10th Circuit Court of Appeals).

76. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 70 as though fully set forth herein.

77. The 10 Defendants in collusion did knowingly and willfully with callous disregard for the

“individual dignity” of Plaintiff a 70-year-old Honorable Veteran from the Vietnam era did

methodically stalked Plaintiff in his daily movements for removal from the River waterfront

seeing him as an undesirable in their new version of Sebastian Florida. The last implementation

in torture to break and individual is to take away their “individual dignity” that they are helpless

and no one is around to save them so just surrender. Defendants stealing Plaintiffs kayak was

plain torture because Plaintiff knew the thief from the beginning and that he would have no

choice but to confront these Communist style criminals for as long as it took. His plan to live in

peace and enjoy life on the River and ocean were gone. To amplify such indignation, one need

only look at the tag team effort of Defendant Benton and Defendant Jursik in their comical

display when the kayak was returned to degrade Plaintiffs “individual dignity” who they saw as

a homeless indigent and that there was nothing he could do that they and their 8 other

conspirators were in charge. No sign of any of remorse for the pain and suffering and mental

anguish Plaintiff had endured, just take your kayak with the damage done to it and all given with

a smile of contempt. The theft of Plaintiffs kayak and the coverup of the crimes under Florida

Law committed by the 10 Defendants acting to collusion was an attack on Plaintiffs “individual

dignity” as defined by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.

COUNT 3 – 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Fourth Amendment Violation “liberty” as defined by 10th

Circuit Court of Appeals).

78. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 70 as though fully set forth herein.
79. The 10 Defendants in collusion did knowingly and willfully with callous disregard for the

“liberty” of Plaintiff a 70-year-old Honorable Veteran from the Vietnam era stole Plaintiffs

kayak and retained it in secret even when Defendants knew Plaintiff was the owner in order to

deprive Plaintiff of his “liberty” to live the lifestyle he had chosen. The minute Plaintiffs kayak

was stolen he no longer had the “liberty” to return to his island camp paradise he loved and felt

secure on. Only when Plaintiff began swimming back and forth each day under dangerous

conditions and in cold weather at that time did he regain his “liberty” but only at the risk of his

own life and discomfort especially at 5 AM in the morning (See paragraph 29). Taking a man’s

liberty is the first order in the Communist rule book (See Preliminary Statement) for then after

that you can control and degrade him and destroy the other rights exemplified under the 4 th

Amendment and other Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The 10 Defendants presumed that

with the kayak gone so would be Plaintiff which is the typical mindset for those who have taken

over Sebastian City government and its employees. The 10 Defendants acting to collusion was

an attack on Plaintiffs “individual dignity” as defined by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.

COUNT 4 – 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Fourth Amendment Violation “property” as defined by 10th

Circuit Court of Appeals).

80. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 70 as though fully set forth herein.

81. The 10 Defendants in collusion did knowingly and willfully with callous disregard for the

“property” of Plaintiff a 70-year-old Honorable Veteran from the Vietnam era did steal

Plaintiffs kayak in their attempt to intimidate and drive Plaintiff away from Sebastian Florida.

Florida Statutes Title XLVI.- Crimes § 812.014 – Theft states, "(1) A person commits theft if he

or she knowingly obtains or uses, or endeavors to obtain or to use, the property of another with

intent to, either temporarily or permanently:(a) Deprive the other person of a right to the
property or a benefit from the property." All 10 Defendants are thieves under Florida Law. As

definitively shown Plaintiffs kayak was on state water bottom land and not in the jurisdiction of

the City of Sebastian. None of the 10 Defendants had any legal authority to touch Plaintiffs

kayak. Even in some demented state they thought they did under their concocted scheme of

“abandoned property” there is a specific stated 5-day notice under Florida Statute 705.103 –

Procedure for abandoned or lost property (2)(a)1 is required to be attached to the property before

any removal. No such notice was ever posted on Plaintiffs kayak for he sees it twice each day

and this lack of notice was verified by Defendant City (See paragraphs 49 - 53). Furthermore,

under Florida Statute 705.103 only a law enforcement officer is allowed to remove any

abandoned property and only if “such nature that it can be easily removed.” Defendant Jursik is

the only police officer of the listed 10 Defendants and his involvement at this point is presumed

to be in the cover up in violation of state laws that were committed. Plaintiffs kayak was securely

anchored into state water bottom land with one chain and one steel cable and 4 locks which took

bolt cutter to cut off the locks, chain and cable and the 30-inch-long anchor screw turn down had

to be laboriously unscrewed from the beach and was not of “such nature that it can be easily

removed.” Furthermore, Florida Statutes 806.13 Criminal mischief; penalties; penalty for minor

(1)(a) states, “A person commits the offense of criminal mischief if he or she willfully and

maliciously injures or damages by any means any real or personal property belonging to

another, including, but not limited to, the placement of graffiti thereon or other acts of vandalism

thereto.” The 10 Defendants acting in collusion vandalized Plaintiffs kayak in the theft process

destroying the aforementioned locking mechanisms that secured the kayak to the 30 – inch - long

anchor turn down and then committed addition acts of theft under Florida Statute Title XLVI -

Crimes § 812.014 - Theft when they stole accessories that were attached to the kayak.
Furthermore, Fraud in Florida is defined as a misrepresentation of a material fact; by a person or

entity who knows or believes it to be false; to a person or entity who justifiably relies on the

misrepresentation; and where actual injury or loss resulting from his or her reliance. City

Defendant committed fraud by definition in the use of fraudulent city limits maps to deceive

Plaintiff and every one else for years into believing that the city owns all the river bottom out to

the main channel where such fraud was perpetuated by the hideous charade put on by Defendant

Benton and Defendant Jursik in the “abandon property” scam spearheaded by Defendant Anon

and Defendant Carlisle with the knowledge of the Mayor and 4 city council members (all

Defendants). Fraud as seen in the Case & Facts exudes from every pore of this case as these 10

Defendants worked in collusion to rid Sebastian of Plaintiff in the violation of Florida Law and

Plaintiffs 4th Amendment Right to personal “property.” Furthermore, the 10 listed defendants

acting in collusion failed to obey the most basic of state laws and common decency when there

was no 5-day notice posted on Plaintiff kayak before it was stolen. State legislators created the 5-

day notice pursuant to Florida Statute 705.103 Procedure for abandoned or lost property

(2)(a)1 to prevent such acts of theft by police officers so that situations like Plaintiffs kayak

location could be discussed and resolved before any criminal actions by police officers are

instigated. There was no 5-day notice because this was a deliberate act of theft instigated directly

or indirectly by all Defendants and then covered up once discovered in order to get rid of

Plaintiff by removing his “property” which in the demented minds of the 10 Defendants would

remove Plaintiff from the waterfront. Plaintiffs Constitutional rights under the 4th Amendment

were violated when his “property” as defined by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals was stolen

that thereafter led to the Counts 1 - 6 violations.

COUNT 5 – 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Fourth Amendment Violation “privacy” as defined by 10th

Circuit Court of Appeals).

82. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 70 as though fully set forth herein.

83. The 10 Defendants in collusion did knowingly and willfully with callous disregard for the

“privacy” of Plaintiff a 70-year-old Honorable Veteran from the Vietnam era when Defendants

stole Plaintiffs kayak in their attempt to intimidate and drive Plaintiff away from Sebastian

Florida. Plaintiff return to Sebastian Florida to live a peaceful and very private life style and

until the theft of his kayak stayed to himself while enjoying the River as he did in his youth.

Plaintiff is now and for years to come will be forced to become very public. Plaintiff is Honor

and Duty bound to uphold his oath to the United States Constitution to protect and defend it

against all enemies, foreign and domestic. The 10 Defendants acting in collusion are just home-

grown terrorist using Communist tactics to subvert the Constitution where Plaintiff has no choice

now but to pursue for as many years as it takes both in public and in the courts year after year as

stated in his documents to the 10 listed Defendants. Plaintiff “privacy” will no longer exist for

many years to come. Plaintiffs Constitutional rights under the 4th Amendment were violated

when his “privacy” as defined by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals was taken by the 10 named

Defendants.

COUNT 6 – 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Fourth Amendment Violation of the United States

Constitution).

84. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 70 as though fully set forth herein.

85. Florida Statute 112.311 referenced in Paragraph 25 of the Preliminary Statement is the

origin of this case in that it is the total lack of “standards of ethics” by all 10 Defendants that
lead them to first steal Plaintiffs kayak and then try to cover up this theft by saying it was

“abandoned property.” The Fourth Amendment states, “The right of the people to be secure in

their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall

not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or

affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be

seized.” America today is in chaos and turmoil because officers and employees like the 10

Defendants lacked any “standards of ethics” and as stated in the Preliminary Statement this

“spits in the face of this Florida Statute and the United States Constitution.” It is further worth

repeating from the Preliminary Statement and why Plaintiff is pursuing this case, “Plaintiff owes

a duty to future generations and more importantly in memory of the “Old Ones” from “Old

Florida” who taught him life on the River and Atlantic coastal waters to never allow such

behavior to survive in his presence. "When injustice becomes law, rebellion becomes duty.”

Thomas Jefferson.”

86. 112.311 Legislative intent and declaration of policy Subpart (6) states, “It is declared to be

the policy of the state that public officers and employees, state and local, are agents of the

people and hold their positions for the benefit of the public. They are bound to uphold the

Constitution of the United States and the State Constitution and to perform efficiently and

faithfully their duties under the laws of the federal, state, and local governments. Such officers

and employees are bound to observe, in their official acts, the highest standards of ethics

consistent with this code and the advisory opinions rendered with respect hereto regardless of

personal considerations, recognizing that promoting the public interest and maintaining the

respect of the people in their government must be of foremost concern.”

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that:

1. The Court award Plaintiff Compensatory Damages against Defendants Benton, Carlisle,

Anon, Jones, Nunn, Dixon, Dodd, McPartian and Jursik Jointly and Severely to the sum

of ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($100,000) each and Compensatory

Damages of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) against Defendant City;

2. The Court award Plaintiff Punitive Damages Jointly and Severely to the sum of FIVE

HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000) each against Defendants Benton,

Carlisle, Anon, Jones, Nunn, Dixon, Dodd, McPartian and Jursik;

3. The Plaintiff recover his costs of this suit, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, as

provided by the law; and

4. The Court grant the Plaintiff such relief as the nature of the case may require or as may

be deemed just and proper by this Court

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff, hereby requests a trial by jury on all issues so triable.