LFL Founders Writ of Habeas Corpus -
Clive F. Boustred
Santa Cruz County Prisoner Number: S-208969
Institutional Address: Santa Cruz County
Superior Court of California
|
Clive Frank Boustred,
Petitioner.
Vs.
Santa Cruz County: Irwn H. Joseph/ IRWN H. JOSEPH, Superior
Court Commissioner; Samuel S. Stevens/SAMUEL S. STEVENS,
Superior Court Judge; Robert Atack/ROBERT ATACK, Presiding
Superior Court Judge; Steve Robbins/STEVE ROBBINS, Sheriff;
Christie Swannac/CHRISTIE SWANNAC, Sheriff Sergeant; Sheriff;
Fred Plageman/FRED PLAGEMAN, Sheriff Sergeant; Bob Lee/BOB LEE,
District Attorney; Alex Calvo/ALEX CALVO, Superior Court Chief
Executive Officer.
Defendants. |
Case No._____________
PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS;
AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. |
DECLARATION
Even if I had the two
hundred thousand dollars bribe money the judges in Santa Cruz County
want to dismiss the 7th, 8th and 9th
maliciously prosecuted cases Santa Cruz County is prosecuting against me
since their Sheriffs Shooting Instructor attempted to murder me in front
of my children by shooting at me with a lethal weapon from a range of
five to seven feet on March, 10, 2003, I would not pay them!
Even though Commissioner
Irwin Joseph to whom I specifically precluded any general subject matter
jurisdiction issued illegal orders to evict me from my home the very
days he was attempting to have himself dismissed from the lawsuit I was
prosecuting against himself, and even though he has issued orders that I
not be allowed to enter or file any evidence in my case or even file a
quitclaim on my homestead, and even though Irwin Joseph ordered that I
not communicate with my children and I have been unlawfully evicted from
my home and my children have been kidnapped from me and I have not been
able to even communicate with by boys for more than six months, I cannot
bring myself to pay a bribe to these criminals acting under the color of
law in Santa Cruz County, even though they are now attempting to give me
more sham trials where they are likely to lock me up for the rest of my
life.
Not being able to even
wish my sons happy Christmas or happy birthday hurts like hell.
I have moved from Santa
Cruz and live and work in Lake Elsinore because I am clearly not safe in
Santa Cruz as the authorities there clearly are nothing less than a
bunch of filthy criminals.
My personal experience
and the extensive San Jose Mercury News Tainted Trials Stolen Justice
expert analysis by top legal authorities throughout the Nation has
proven that the Appellate System is noting but a sham:
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/special_packages/stolenjustice
None of these facts are
disputed and these facts are easily proven, except for perhaps the
method the judges in Santa Cruz used to let me know that if I paid them
$200,000 they would dismiss the false cases they are now mutinously
prosecuting against me. For their blackmail attempt, a woman going by
the name Michele Soisson and claiming to be the niece of Judge Samuel S.
Stevens, approached my friends and told them that for $200,000 any case
before Stevens or Judge Robert Atack could be dismissed and that I
should not sue her uncle Samuel S. Stevens because he was a ‘good guy’.
Both Judges Stevens and Atack are also defendants in my lawsuits against
Santa Cruz County. They insist on presiding over the cases the county is
maliciously prosecuting against me Santa Cruz Superior Court Case
numbers F17075, F17078 & M45132. My formal motions to dismiss and
appeals to the Judicial Nominations Committee have been all been ignored
(It should be Judicially Noted that despite the Judicial Nominations
Committee rating Judge Art Danner, the Judge who sentenced me to jail
for six months for driving at 27 mph down my private road before the
Santa Cruz Sheriffs attempted to murder me, was TWICE rated as “Not
Qualified” to be a judge. The Judicial Nominations Committee ruling
however made no difference to what happened in Santa Cruz County where a
plaque outside the District Attorney’s office proudly proclaims Art
Danner as ‘A Man Of Justice’).
Facts for all these
other issues are irrefutable. Many witnesses saw the Sheriffs Shooting
Instructor attempt to blow my head off for no legal or remotely
excusable reason with my three and seven year old sons also in the
direct line of fire. The deputy (who has now been promoted to Sergeant)
even admitted on the record to shooting at me and stated on the record
that a Sergeant stopped him from taking a second shot.
The Nationally renowned
criminal and former District Attorney for Santa Cruz, the “Not
Qualified” Judge Art Danner of the Santa Cruz Superior Court sentenced
me to six months in jail for driving at 27mph down my private road
before they tried to murder me and claimed that driving at 27 mph down a
private road is a Felony – The 6th Appellate District Ignored
the facts and law in my Appeal. Although when federal court issued an
order to show cause as to why driving at 27 mph down a private road is a
crime and why I was being prosecuted, Santa Cruz County responded with a
“Notice of No Interest” (Exhibit L).
Santa Cruz County and
Superior Court has repeatedly refused to honor the Stipulated Custody
Court Order that was issued as a result of a Level II custody
investigation by their own court psychiatrist (Exhibit A). Since
shooting at me, Santa Cruz County has for more than six years held my
children hostage!
When comparing the
orders issued by Commissioner Irwin Joseph (the primary defendant in my
lawsuit against the county) to the motions for hearings filed in
attempts to have Irwin Joseph dismissed from the lawsuit I was
prosecuting against him, it’s impossible to not realize that the
Commissioner without any subject matter jurisdiction or legal basis
orders my eviction from my homestead on the very same day he is trying
to get himself dismissed from the case I am prosecuting against him
(Exhibits D, E, F & G).
The new cases Santa Cruz
County is now prosecuting against me are based on the eviction order
(Santa Cruz Superior Court Cases F 17075, F 17078)
These facts are all
irrefutable and easily proven, the evidence is provided in the exhibits.
I declare under penalty
of perjury under the laws of the United States of America and the State
of California that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and belief, and that I have executed this Declaration in
California
Date: March 19,
2009 __________________________________
Clive
Boustred, In Propria Persona Sui Juris
ARGUMENT
Petitioner Clive Frank
Boustred who now lives and works in Riverside County is subject to the
jurisdiction of Riverside County, brings this Writ of Habeas Corpus and
Order to Show Cause before the Court with good cause in an attempt to
obtain rudimentary justice.
Following the Santa Cruz
Sheriffs without any reasonable, legal or good cause shooting at
Petitioner (with Petitioner’s three and seven year old sons also in the
direct line of fire) on March 10, 2003, Santa Cruz County has
continuously maliciously and outrageously prosecuted Petitioner.
Petitioner seeks an impartial and fair Court. By law, the Santa Cruz
County and Court lost jurisdiction when their Sheriffs shot at
Petitioner.
Petitioner seeks the
dismissal of unlawful orders to evict petitioner from his homestead; to
prevent petitioner form submitting evidence or filing records; and from
communicating with or enjoying the custody of his children. Petitioner
also seeks the dismissal of the related malicious prosecution cases
filed against Petitioner in regard to the illegal order evicting
petitioner from his homestead.
The malicious
prosecution of Petitioner by the Santa Cruz Authorities has reached the
extreme of unlawfully evicting Petitioner from his homestead, burgling
Petitioner’s homestead, and ordering Petitioner to not communicate with
his children for no cause.
Petitioner’s son has
turned 13 and he wishes to live with his father in Lake Elsinore.
Petitioner seeks the Riverside Superior Court’s intervention.
Santa Cruz Superior
Court Commissioner Irwin H. Joseph issued an order to evict Petitioner
from Petitioner’s homestead the very day Irwin Joseph sought to have
himself dismissed from the lawsuit filed against Santa Cruz County for
the assault of Petitioner and his children (EXHIBIT B: U.S. District
Court Jan Jose case C08 00546 where IRWIN H. JOSEPH is a primary
defendant; EXHIBIT D: Commissioner Irwin H. Joseph’s first attempt to
issue an illegal order to evict Petitioner from his Homestead and office
- Note the day the Commissioner orders the eviction is the very day the
Commissioner is attempting to have himself dismissed from the lawsuit
Petitioner filed against the Commissioner – EXHIBIT E: U.S. District
Court Case C08 00546 where Joseph attempted to have himself dismissed
from the case Defendant was prosecuting against him on May 23, 2008;
EXHIBIT F: Commissioner Irwin H. Joseph’s second attempt to issue an
order to evict Petitioner from his Homestead; EXHIBIT G: U.S. District
Court Case C08 00546 and Joseph’s second attempted to have himself
dismissed from the case while Petitioner was held under false arrest
with bail set at $200,000 – Note the $200K bail is the same as the bribe
money the Santa Cruz Superior Court Judges are apparently now seeking to
have the cases dismissed).
None of the orders filed
against Petitioner since March 10, 2003, following the assassination
attempt of Petitioner by Santa Cruz Authorities are lawful. 9 false
cases have been prosecuted against Petitioner in an attempt to bludgeon
Petitioner into silence.
There appears to be no
opportunity to obtain justice, the Sixth Appellate District to which
Petitioner has plead, has been proven through extensive expert analysis
in the San Jose Mercury News Tainted Trials Stolen Justice program to be
completely corrupt.
http://www.mercurynews.com/taintedtrials
Petitioner is a good and
honest man of the highest integrity who has made significant
contributions to the Nation and economy through his many developments in
Silicon Valley. Petitioner has the highest respect for the law.
Following the Santa Cruz Sheriffs Shooting at Petitioner he has been
blasted with a slew of outrageous and malicious prosecutions stemming
from Santa Cruz County that shock the conscience.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE:
Petitioner respectfully Orders to Show Cause as to
the legal reasons and laws to which he is being punished and prosecuted
in the Santa Cruz Superior Court in relation to:
- What is the authority and law under which
Petitioner has been ordered to not communicate with his children and
from which his children have been taken from him?
(September 11, 2008 No Communication with Children Order - Exhibit
I)
- What is the authority and law under which
Petitioner has been evicted from his homestead?
(Santa Cruz Superior Court Case FL 16028 – May 14, 2008 Eviction
Order Exhibit - D; August 27, 2008 Eviction Order - Exhibit F;
September 11, 2008 No Evidence Order - Exhibit J)
- What is the authority and law under which
Petitioner’s homestead is being sold?
(Santa Cruz Superior Court Case FL 16028 August 27, 2008 Eviction
Order - Exhibit F)
- What is the authority and law under which
Petitioner is being prevented from recording in the Santa Cruz
Recorders Office a Quit-Claim on Petitioners homestead to pay
Petitioner’s primary creditors?
(Santa Cruz Superior Court Case FL 16028 September 11, 2008 No
Evidence Order - Exhibit J)
- Under what authority and law has the
Stipulated Court Order which is a Final Judgment regarding the
custody of Petitioner’s children and the payout of Petitioner’s
ex-wife for Petitioner’s home, been set aside and/or ignored?
(Santa Cruz superior Court Case FL 16028 order dates August 13, 2002
Exhibit A – Petitioner paid out his ex-wife for his home more than
six years ago)
- Under what lawful authority is Petitioner
being forced into a court of equity and denied any right to trial by
jury or even a right to conclude his divorce case?
(Santa Cruz Superior Court Case FL 16028 filed July 12, 2002 – see
1789 Judiciary Act Section 16: “And be it further enacted, That
suits in equity shall not be sustained in either of the courts of
the United States, in any case where plain, adequate and complete
remedy may be had at law.”)
- Where or what is the proof of any of the
so-called crimes Petitioner committed?
(Please provide evidence of the MENS REA - willful intent, ACTUS
REUS - act or crime, CORPUS DELICTI - body of the crime, the actual
damage in Santa Cruz Superior Court Cases: F 06858, F 17075, F 17078
and M45132; and Placer County Superior Court Case # 72-002045)
- Where is the Grand Jury Indictment or
Presentment for any of the so-called crimes Petitioner committed?
(Santa Cruz Superior Court Cases: F 06858, F 17075, F 17078 and
M45132; Placer County Superior Court Case # 72-002045)
- Is driving safely at 27 mph down a private
road a crime? And if driving at 27mph on a private road is not a
crime, how is it that Petitioner was found guilty of committing a
Felony when Petitioner never committed any crime?
(Santa Cruz Superior Court Case F 06858)
- Is it a felony to own guns lawfully purchased
with a permit? Why is Petitioner being prosecuted for guns
Petitioner purchased lawfully with permits?
(Santa Cruz Superior Court Case F 17078)
- Why was Petitioner alone picked out amongst
six passengers and arrested and charged for drunk in public when
Petitioner was neither drunk nor in public?
(Santa Cruz Superior Court Case M45132)
- Under what authority and law has Petitioner
been forced to pay the Santa Cruz Sheriff $200,000 + $150,000 in
bail?
(Santa Cruz Superior Court Cases: F 06858, F 17075, F 17078)
- Under what authority and law are IRWIN H.
JOSEPH/Irwin H. Joseph, SAMUEL S. STEVENS/Samuel S. Stevens and
ROBERT B. ATACK/Robert B. Atack presiding over Santa Cruz Superior
Court Cases where Petitioner is a party when Petitioner has and is
actively suing these men?
(Irwin H. Joseph, Samuel S. Stevens and Robert Atack are defendants
in the San Jose / Northern California Division of United States
District Court Cases C05 000996 21 and C08 00546).
- What lawful authority does IRWIN H.
JOSEPH/Irwin H. Joseph and SAMUEL S. STEVENS/Samuel S. Stevens have
to issue orders against Petitioner and why should their orders not
be set aside?
(Orders issued in Santa Cruz Superior Court Case F 16028; Irwin H.
Joseph, Samuel S. Stevens and Robert Atack are defendants in the San
Jose / Northern California Division of United States District Court
Cases C05 000996 21 and C08 00546).
Should no lawful and just answer be given to any of
the Orders To Show Cause, the Court agrees to grant Petitioner’s Plea.
I declare under penalty
of perjury under the laws of the United States of America and the State
of California that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and belief, and that I have executed this Declaration in
California
Date: March 19,
2009 __________________________________
Clive
Boustred, In Propria Persona Sui Juris
PLEA
WHEREFORE,
petitioner prays that the Court grant petitioner relief to which he may
be entitled in this proceeding. In particular petitioner respectfully
requests the following:
1.
Petitioner’s children be returned to Petitioner in conformance
with the Stipulated Custody Agreement Entered on August 13, 2002.
2.
Petitioner’s homestead and his private property be returned to
him.
3.
All orders issued by Santa Cruz Superior Court Judge SAMUEL S.
STEVENS, and Commissioner IRWIN H. JOSEPH against Petitioner be
dismissed with prejudice;
4.
All the false convictions against Petitioners be dismissed and
expunged from the record;
5.
Petitioners be granted a fair judge and jury to expediently try
and conclude Petitioners divorce in accordance with the law;
6.
That Santa Cruz Authorities be restrained from harassing and
maliciously prosecuting Petitioner and his children;
7.
That Petitioner is granted financial and legal relief & Santa
Cruz County be sanctioned.
I declare under penalty
of perjury under the laws of the United States of America and the State
of California that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and belief, and that I have executed this Declaration in
California
Date: March 19,
2009 __________________________________
Clive
Boustred, In Propria Persona Sui Juris
See Habeas EVIDENCE |
