NOTICE New York – RICO COMPLAINT Stay Tuned

In the Courts Of the United States

of New York State

Judson Witham,                     )            Case No.

Plaintiff,                                      )

)     VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR

v.                                                    )     DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE

)    RELIEF AND DAMAGES FROM

DEC New York State         )     RACKETEERING, CONSPIRACY

State of New York               )    TO ENGAGE IN A PATTERN OF

Andrew Cuomo                     )    RACKETEERING ACTIVITY

Basil Seggos                             )    CIVIL RIGHTS DEPRIVATIONS

Commissioner DEC            )      AND RELATED CLAIMS;

Unkown John and               )

Jane Doe’ s Agents             )

and Employees for             )

New York State, 1 – 10     )

Warren County                   )

New York, NYS DEC        )

and the

Lake George Park Commission

New York State                     )          JURY DEMAND IS MADE

Defendants

I.

Plaintiff’s Original Complaint

As Private Sui Juris, Private Attorney General and In Qui Tam

To the Court of Said Jurisdiction …. Now Comes Judson Witham, Beneficiary, Devisee of the Clifford and Anita Witham Estate and as Private Attorney General, Whistleblower in Qui Tam in the Name of the People and says as follows……

  1. This is a complex civil action for RICO remedies authorized by the federal statutes at 18 U.S.C. 1961 et seq.; for declaratory and injunctive relief; for actual, consequential and exemplary damages; and for all other relief which this honorable Superior Court deems just and proper under all circumstances which have occasioned this Initial COMPLAINT. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1964(a) and (c) (“Civil RICO”).
  2. The primary cause of this action is a widespread criminal and civil enterprises engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity across State lines, and a conspiracy to engage in racketeering activity involving numerous RICO predicate acts during the past ten (75+) calendar years.
  3. The predicate acts alleged here cluster around criminal activities to employ unlawful means to acquire real estate and assets not belonging to The State Of New York , tampering with and retaliation against a qualified Federal Witness, interstate transportation of stolen property, obstruction of justice, obstruction of criminal investigations, obstruction of State and local law enforcement, peonage and slavery. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 2319, 2320, 1512, 1513, 2315, 1503, 1510, 1511 and 1581-1588 respectively.
  4. Other RICO predicate acts, although appearing to be isolated events, were actually part of the overall conspiracy and pattern of racketeering activity alleged herein, e.g. mail fraud and bank fraud. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341 and 1344, respectively.
  5. The primary objective of the racketeering enterprise has been to inflict severe and sustained economic hardship upon Plaintiff’s Family, and others with the intent of impairing, obstructing, preventing and discouraging Plaintiff from writing, publishing, investigating and conducting judicial activism as a qualified Private Attorney General.
  6. ALL of the above unlawful activities have been actively Concealed in violation of the Fraudulent Concealment Doctrine and kept hidden and secreted from the knowledge of Plaintiff and the General Public. The aims of the activity are to control real estate markets, marketability and the use of Private Lands to allow New York State to Control and Ultimately Acquire Said Lands for the Benefit of the Empire State.
  7. The enormity of the destruction of Private Properties, Public Properties, Environment and the Dangers posed as a result are well in excess of Twenty Million Dollars …… The State and Federal Courts have concurrent Jurisdiction under the Civil and Constitutional Protection Laws of New York and the United States. Additionally International Human Rights Rights Protect People in Their Property and Safety Interests from such Racketeering Activity.
  8. Unlawfully conspiring to Take Land and Aquire Lands and Properties from Private Individuals in New York, New England, New France and The New Netherlands has been an ONGOING and CONTINUING Practice in New York for as long as 500 Years. Said unlawful practices, policies and customs of UNLAWFUL TAKINGS and Racketeering Conspiracies to Take Property Unlawfully are ONGOING IN NEW YORK.

II.

JURISDICTION

  1. This honorable Court has original jurisdiction pursuant to the civil RICO remedies at 18 U.S.C. 1964, and the holdings of the U.S. Supreme Court in Tafflin v. Levitt, 493 U.S. 455 (1990), and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Lou v. Belzberg, 834 F.2d 730, hn. 4 (9th Cir. 1987) (New York State Courts and Federal Courts have concurrent jurisdiction of civil, criminal RICO claims and for violations of Property and Constitutional Protections under State and Federal Laws and Constitutions ).
  2. This Honorable Court has Concurrent State and Federal Jurisdiction as the property, personal and environmental damages associated herein exceed Twenty Million Dollars.
  3. 42 USC 1983 – 1986 and the International Human Rights and Constitutional Rights violated in this matter give Jurisdiction to this Honorable Court.
  4. Ocean Dumping Act 33 U.S.C. 1401 33 U.S.C., Chapter 9 – Protection of Navigable Waters 33 U.S.C., Chapter 26 – Clean Water Act 42 U.S.C., Chapter 55 – National Environmental Policy 40 C.F.R. – Protection of Environment
  5. The policy of New York State; set forth in Title 5 of Article 15 of the Environmental Conservation Law (ECL) , is to preserve and protect these lakes, rivers, streams and ponds.
  6. 42 U.S. Code § 3613 – Enforcement by private persons
  7. Qui Tam Powers of Private Citizens ……. In common law, a writ of qui tam is a writ whereby a private individual who assists a prosecution can receive all or part of any penalty imposed. Its name is an abbreviation of the Latin phrase qui tam pro domino rege quam pro se ipso in hac parte sequitur, meaning “[he] who sues in this matter for the king as well as for himself.”

III.

Factual Averments and Back Ground

  1. During the Month of August 2016 The Above Defendants Racketeering Enterprise through actions of the agents John and Jane Doe 1 – 10 at the Raybrook New York Offices of the Empire State’s DEC Agency, a Fraudulent Course of Action was HATCHED to make false Police Reports and to Fraudulently seek Plaintiff Witham’s Arrest and or Confinement for the HATCHED, Concocted and FABRICATED, UNTRUTHFUL Claims that Plaintiff was Threatening the Racketeers and Their Enterprises with some sort of DIRTY BOMB attack upon the Authorities and or Environment of New York State. Your Plaintiff’s Personal Information, Telephone and Address Information was accessed Both In and Out Of New York State to TRACK and LOCATE Him for the purposes of implementing this UNLAWFUL SCHEME of Retaliation. Said retaliation was aimed at Intimidating in an effort to SILENCE Plaintiff and thereby assaulting His rights to write, publish and speak the truth in violation of the 1st Amendment and the International Declaration on Human Rights.
  2. The activities were also ENGINEERED to cover up and conceal DEC’s and the State of New York’s DEC Albany and Raybrook’s Regin 5 refusing to comply with VALID FOIL and FOIA requests for Public Information and Records.
  3. Said claims where completely, wholly and absolute Gibberish and Nonsense and obviously seriously injurious to the Name and Character of Your Plaintiff. Said false reports were transmitted ACROSS STATE LINES to North Carolina State Police and the Wake County Sheriff’s Office / US Marshal’s Authorities in North Carolina and to the New York State Authorities including the Warren County Sheriff’s Office and Warren County Board of Supervisors.
  4. The Above efforts to retaliate, interfere with and unlawfully punish Your Plaintiff is directly connected with His efforts to UNCOVER and DIG OUT THE TRUTH in these matters regarding the Hiding and Secreting of Public Records and Files in New York State’s SOLE Custody and Control.
  5. The ongoing and continuing practice of WINTER TIME, During Ice and Snow Sheet conditions on Lake George New York are still the Custom, Policy and Practice of the State of New York and It’s Agents, Representatives and Employees. Said Ice Sheet Period Lake Level FLUSHING was the destructive force employed to Destroy Islands, Lake Shore, Boat Houses, Islands and Docks ( like those at The Witham Family Marina ). Said annual damages are extremely PROFITABLE for the Empire State, The Custom, Policy and Practices associated herewith allow the State to Fund and Practice, Control and Perpetrate the RICO ENTERPRISE upon Lake George, New York as well as throughout the State’s SO CALLED Environmental Conservation / Protection Agencies.
  6. The factual averments associated with Winter Time Ice and Snow Sheet Manipulations ( The WEAPON OF DESTRUCTION ) are described as follows.

AFact2

frttisludge

frttisludge2IV.

Factual Findings, Historical Records and Witness / Evidentiary Records as follows.

  1. Recently Your Plaintiff has come to learn that the Water Release Capacity of the DAM “A” at the exist of Lake George, NY at the La Chute River is only able to release 46% of the water needed to prevent a dangerous and unlawful over topping of the Exit Dam that controls the Ice Sheet Levels on the Lake.

SEE  ALSO  THE  DEC  JOHN STETSON ENGINEERING REPORT

Abstract
The examination of documents and visual inspection of the dam and appurtenant structures did not reveal conditions which constitute an immediate hazard to human life or property. The dam, however, has a number of problem areas which should be investigated further. The structural stability analysis indicates unsatisfactory stability for the dam when subjected to forces which could occur during winter operations (including ice loading), the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF), and 1/2 PMF events. A structural stability investigation of the dam should be started within 6 months to determine the effect of the dam’s steel bar anchor system and the uplift forces acting on the base of the dam. Remedial measures should be completed within 2 years to increase the structural stability of the facility to meet the Corps of Engineers screening criteria. The hydrologic/hydraulic analysis establishes the spillway capacity as 46% of the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) with the sluice gates open and 30% of the PMF if the gates remain closed throughout the storm. The dam will be overtopped by 2.72 feet by the PMF with the gates closed or 2.55 feet with the gates opened. However, the spillway is capable of passing the 1/2 PMF under either of these two conditions without the dam being overtopped. Therefore, the spillway is assessed as inadequate according to the Corps of Engineers screening criteria.       August 1980
John B. Stetson  Defense Technical Information Center  DOD
  1. The Lake George Park Commission has many times described the Dam’s inadequacy as has the US Army Corp of Engineers and the Dam Safety Inspection Division of New York State as ” Inadequate ” to properly release Spring Waters from Lake George. New York’s Control of Dam “A ” is conducted in an UNSAFE, DESTRUCTIVE and RECKLESS manner. Said Injurious Dam Operations have been owned and controlled by New York State and It’s Conservation Agencies for some 75+ Years.
  2. In years past for many years in a row, 1960 – 1970 as it relates to the Present Case, New York State practices WINTER LAKE DRAWDOWNS during Ice and Snow Sheet Cover because of the Present Dam’s inability to adequately release Spring Run Off or Snow Pack and Ice Sheet Melt and the Spring Rains. This inadequate Dam is less than 1/2 able to handle the Spring Waters. The Pinhole in the Bath Tub is Controlled and Owned by New York State and it’s Corporate Agents, Partners and Representatives.
  3. For many Years the inadequate Dam in the Winter LOWERED the Ice Sheet and Snow on Lake George exerting Many Millions of Pounds of Ice Sheet forces ….. in both Downward and Upward manner upon Clifford and Anita Witham’s Marina at Harris Bay. The Operation and Destructive forces were intentional and were well understood by Your Defendants.
  4. The Witham Family Marina solely because The inadequacy of the State’s Dam and the Reckless and Intentional Operations to Control Ice Sheet Levels repeatedly destroyed the Witham Marina many times from 1960 – 1970.
  5. The massive destruction of Boat Houses, Docks Bulkheads , Shoreline and Islands has been on account of the MILL POND OPERATIONS which I have recently learned are practiced for ENVIRONMENTAL FLUSHING of Sewage, Leachate and chemicals from Lake George Waters as well as the State maintaining and operating this wholly inadequate Flushing, Drain or Drawdown Facility known as Dam “A ” Dam # 230 on the State’s Dam Safety Inventory.
  6. The State has had knowledge, knew fully well and in accordance therewith , have with Scienter Operated Their Inadequate Dam and said Operation of it has for many years been and continues to destroy private property on Lake George. The flushing of the contaminates of Lake George are also purposely sent to the La Chute River and Lake Champlain, the Richelieu River and the Saint Lawrence River as New York State’s Environmental Conservation Employees, Commissioners, and Agents and Representatives of New York State perpetuate and continue operations of DUMPING SEWAGE and CHEMICALS Continues ( A Continuing Enterprise and Nuisance )

aadump

COUNT ONE:

Acquisition and Maintenance of an Interest in and Control of an Enterprise Engaged in a Pattern of Racketeering Activity for the purposes of depriving Individuals of Constitutionally Protected Interests in Private Property

18 U.S.C. §§ 1961(5), 1962(b)

  1. At various times and places partially enumerated in Plaintiff’s documentary material, all Defendants did acquire and/or maintain, directly or indirectly, an interest in or control of a RICO enterprise of individuals who were associated in fact and who did engage in, and whose activities did affect, interstate and foreign commerce, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961(4), (5), (9), and 1962(b).
  2. During the ten (75 +) calendar years preceding A.D., all Defendants did cooperate jointly and severally in the commission of two (2) or more of the RICO predicate acts that are itemized in the RICO laws at 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961(1)(A) and (B), and did so in violation of the RICO law at 18 U.S.C. 1962(b) (Prohibited activities).
  3. Plaintiff further alleges that all Defendants did commit two (2) or more of the offenses itemized above in a manner which they calculated and premeditated intentionally to threaten continuity, i.e. a continuing threat of their respective racketeering activities, also in violation of the RICO law at 18 U.S.C. 1962(b) supra.
  4. Pursuant to the original Statutes at Large, the RICO laws itemized above are to be liberally construed by this honorable Court. Said construction rule was never codified in Title 18 of the United States Code, however. See 84 Stat. 947, Sec. 904, Oct. 15, 1970.
  5. Respondent superior (principal is liable for agents’ misconduct: knowledge of, participation in, and benefit from a RICO enterprise).

COUNT TWO:

Conduct and Participation in a RICO Enterprise through a Pattern of Racketeering Activity: 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961(5), 1962(c)

  1. At various times and places partially enumerated in Plaintiff’s documentary material, all Defendants did associate with a RICO enterprise of individuals who were associated in fact and who engaged in, and whose activities did affect, interstate and foreign commerce.
  2. Likewise, all Defendants did conduct and/or participate, either directly or indirectly, in the conduct of the affairs of said RICO enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961(4), (5), (9), and 1962(c).
  3. During the ten (75+) calendar years preceding March 1, 2003 A.D., all Defendants did cooperate jointly and severally in the commission of two (2) or more of the RICO predicate acts that are itemized in the RICO laws at 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961(1)(A) and (B), and did so in violation of the RICO law at 18 U.S.C. 1962(c) (Prohibited activities).
  4. Plaintiff further alleges that all Defendants did commit two (2) or more of the offenses itemized above in a manner which they calculated and premeditated intentionally to threaten continuity, i.e. a continuing threat of their respective racketeering activities, also in violation of the RICO law at 18 U.S.C. 1962(c) supra.
  5. Pursuant to 84 Stat. 947, Sec. 904, Oct. 15, 1970, the RICO laws itemized above are to be liberally construed by this honorable Court. Said construction rule was never codified in Title 18 of the United States Code, however. Respondeat superior (as explained above).
  6. The Pleading Stage Averments of a Civil Rights Complaint and that of Property Destruction Cases are to be Liberally Construed in accordance with the Mandates of the United States Supreme Court’s Directives.

COUNT THREE:

Conspiracy to Engage in a

Pattern of Racketeering Activity:

Custom, Policy and Practice to Violate Private Property Rights and Expressive, Writing and Publishing Rights violating the 1st Amendment

18 U.S.C. §§ 1961(5), 1962(d)

  1. Plaintiff now re-alleges each and every allegation as set forth above, and hereby incorporates same by reference, as if all were set forth fully herein. Substance prevails over form.
  2. At various times and places partially enumerated in Plaintiff’s documentary material, all Defendants did conspire to acquire and maintain an interest in a RICO enterprise engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1962(b) and (d).
  3. At various times and places partially enumerated in Plaintiff’s documentary material, all Defendants did also conspire to conduct and participate in said RICO enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1962(c) and (d).

See also 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961(4), (5) and (9).

  1. During the ten (75+) calendar years preceding August15, 2016 A.D., all Defendants did cooperate jointly and severally in the commission of two (2) or more of the predicate acts that are itemized at 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961(1)(A) and (B), in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(d).
  2. Plaintiff further alleges that all Defendants did commit two (2) or more of the offenses itemized above in a manner which they calculated and premeditated intentionally to threaten continuity, i.e. a continuing threat of their respective racketeering activities, also in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(d) (Prohibited activities supra).
  3. Pursuant to 84 Stat. 947, Sec. 904, Oct. 15, 1970, the RICO laws itemized above are to be liberally construed by this honorable Court. Said construction rule was never codified in Title 18 of the United States Code, however. Respondeat superior (as explained above).

achamplain2

V.

RELIEF REQUESTED

Wherefore, pursuant to the statutes at 18 U.S.C. 1964(a) and (c), Plaintiff requests judgment against all named Defendants as follows:

ON COUNT ONE:

  1. That this Court liberally construe the RICO laws and thereby find that all Defendants, both jointly and severally, have acquired and maintained, both directly and indirectly, an interest in and/or control of a RICO enterprise of persons and of other individuals who were associated in fact, all of whom engaged in, and whose activities did affect, interstate and foreign commerce in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(b) (Prohibited activities).
  2. That all Defendants and all their directors, officers, employees, agents, servants and all other persons in active concert or in participation with them, be enjoined temporarily during pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from acquiring or maintaining, whether directly or indirectly, any interest in or control of any RICO enterprise of persons, or of other individuals associated in fact, who are engaged in, or whose activities do affect, interstate or foreign commerce.
  3. That all Defendants and all of their directors, officers, employees, agents, servants and all other persons in active concert or in participation with them, be enjoined temporarily during pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from committing any more predicate acts in furtherance of the RICO enterprise alleged in COUNT ONE supra.
  4. That all Defendants be required to account for all gains, profits, and advantages derived from their several acts of racketeering activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(b) and from all other violation(s) of applicable State and federal law(s).
  5. That judgment be entered for Plaintiff and against all Defendants for Plaintiff’s actual damages, and for any gains, profits, or advantages attributable to all violations of 18 U.S.C. 1962(b), according to the best available proof.
  6. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiff treble (triple) damages, under authority of 18 U.S.C. 1964(c), for any gains, profits, or advantages attributable to all violations of 18 U.S.C. 1962(b), according to the best available proof.
  7. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiff all damages sustained by Plaintiff in consequence of Defendants’ several violations of 18 U.S.C. 1962(b), according to the best available proof.
  8. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiff His costs of the lawsuit incurred herein including, but not limited to, all necessary research, all non-judicial enforcement and all reasonable counsel’s fees, at a minimum of $150.00 per hour worked (Plaintiff’s standard professional rate at start of this action).
  9. That all damages caused by all Defendants, and all gains, profits, and advantages derived by all Defendants, from their several acts of racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(b) and from all other violation(s) of applicable State and federal law(s), be deemed to be held in constructive trust, legally foreign with respect to the federal zone [sic], for the benefit of Plaintiff, His heirs and assigns.
  10. Return of the Witham Family Marina, Tree Farm and Homestead Property consisting of 600+ Acres and the Marine Facility at Harris Bay on Lake George, NY.
  11. Financial Damages in an amount of no less than Twenty Million Dollars
  12. Financial Compensation for Emotional and Physical Distress experienced by Clifford B. Witham II that resulted in His death just 3 years after His Property was taken in the wake of the Destruction of The Family’s Marina Facilities.
  13. Financial Compensation for Emotional and Physical Distress experienced by Anita F. Witham that resulted in the Years after Her Property was taken in the wake of the Destruction of The Family’s Marina Facilities. Mrs. Witham suffered for the rest of Her life until Her death in 1993 some 23 years later.
  14. Financial Compensation for Emotional and Physical Distress experienced by the Witham children that resulted from the unlawful taking of the Family Property that was taken in the wake of the Destruction of The Family’s Marina Facilities.
  15. The Yearly financial losses and costs associated with Marina Destruction and Loss of the Ability to Operate for the Years 1965 – 1970.
  16. Pre and Post Judgment Interest at the Lawful rate of 10%
  17. That Plaintiff have such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper, under the circumstances of this action.
  18. All costs and expenses to accomplish a through clean up and reimbursements for Damaged Lake and River Sediments and for the Lake Shore Islands and Docks, Boat Houses both PRIVATE and Public

ON COUNT TWO:

  1. That this Court liberally construe the RICO laws and thereby find that all Defendants have associated with a RICO enterprise of persons and of other individuals who were associated in fact, all of whom did engage in, and whose activities did affect, interstate and foreign commerce in violation of the RICO law at 18 U.S.C. 1962(c) (Prohibited activities).
  2. That this Court liberally construe the RICO laws and thereby find that all Defendants have conducted and/or participated, directly or indirectly, in the affairs of said RICO enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of the RICO laws at 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961(5) (“pattern” defined) and 1962(c) supra.
  3. That all Defendants and all of their directors, officers, employees, agents, servants and all other persons in active concert or in participation with them, be enjoined temporarily during pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from associating with any RICO enterprise of persons, or of other individuals associated in fact, who do engage in, or whose activities do affect, interstate and foreign commerce.
  4. That all Defendants and all of their directors, officers, employees, agents, servants and all other persons in active concert or in participation with them, be enjoined temporarily during pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from conducting or participating, either directly or indirectly, in the conduct of the affairs of any RICO enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of the RICO laws at 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961(5) and 1962(c) supra.
  5. That all Defendants and all of their directors, officers, employees, agents, servants and all other persons in active concert or in participation with them, be enjoined temporarily during pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from committing any more predicate acts in furtherance of the RICO enterprise alleged in COUNT TWO supra.
  6. That all Defendants be required to account for all gains, profits, and advantages derived from their several acts of racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(c) supra and from all other violation(s) of applicable State and federal law(s).
  7. That judgment be entered for Plaintiff and against all Defendants for Plaintiff’s actual damages, and for any gains, profits, or advantages attributable to all violations of 18 U.S.C. 1962(c) supra, according to the best available proof.
  8. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiff treble (triple) damages, under authority of 18 U.S.C. 1964(c), for any gains, profits, or advantages attributable to all violations of 18 U.S.C. 1962(c) supra, according to the best available proof.
  9. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiff all damages sustained by Plaintiff in consequence of Defendants’ several violations of 18 U.S.C. 1962(c) supra, according to the best available proof.
  10. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiff His costs of the lawsuit incurred herein including, but not limited to, all necessary research, all non-judicial enforcement and all reasonable counsel’s fees, at a minimum of $150.00 per hour worked.
  11. That all damages caused by all Defendants, and all gains, profits, and advantages derived by all Defendants, from their several acts of racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(c) supra and from all other violation(s) of applicable State and federal law(s), be deemed to be held in constructive trust, legally foreign with respect to the federal zone [sic], for the benefit of Plaintiff, His heirs and assigns.
  12. That Plaintiff have such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper, under the full range of relevant circumstances which have occasioned the instant action.

ON COUNT THREE:

  1. That this Court liberally construe the RICO laws and thereby find that all Defendants have conspired to acquire and maintain an interest in, and/or conspired to acquire and maintain control of, a RICO enterprise engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961(5), 1962(b) and (d) supra.
  2. That this Court liberally construe the RICO laws and thereby find that all Defendants have conspired to conduct and participate in said RICO enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961(5), 1962(c) and (d) supra.
  3. That all Defendants and all their directors, officers, employees, agents, servants and all other persons in active concert or in participation with them, be enjoined temporarily during pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from conspiring to acquire or maintain an interest in, or control of, any RICO enterprise that engages in a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961(5), 1962(b) and (d) supra.
  4. That all Defendants and all their directors, officers, employees, agents, servants and all other persons in active concert or in participation with them, be enjoined temporarily during pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from conspiring to conduct, participate in, or benefit in any manner from any RICO enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961(5), 1962(c) and (d) supra.
  5. That all Defendants and all their directors, officers, employees, agents, servants and all other persons in active concert or in participation with them, be enjoined temporarily during pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from committing any more predicate acts in furtherance of the RICO enterprise alleged in COUNT THREE supra.
  6. That all Defendants be required to account for all gains, profits, and advantages derived from their several acts of racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(d) supra and from all other violation(s) of applicable State and federal law(s).
  7. That judgment be entered for Plaintiff and against all Defendants for Plaintiff’s actual damages, and for any gains, profits, or advantages attributable to all violations of 18 U.S.C. 1962(d) supra, according to the best available proof.
  8. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiff treble (triple) damages, under authority of 18 U.S.C. 1964(c), for any gains, profits, or advantages attributable to all violations of 18 U.S.C. 1962(d) supra, according to the best available proof.
  9. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiff all damages sustained by Plaintiff in consequence of Defendants’ several violations of 18 U.S.C. 1962(d) supra, according to the best available proof.
  10. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiff His costs of the lawsuit incurred herein including, but not limited to, all necessary research, all non-judicial enforcement, and all reasonable counsel’s fees, at a minimum of $150.00 per hour worked (Plaintiff’s standard professional rate at start of this action).
  11. That all damages caused by all Defendants, and all gains, profits, and advantages derived by all Defendants, from their several acts of racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(d) supra and from all other violation(s) of applicable State and federal law(s), be deemed to be held in constructive trust, legally foreign with respect to the federal zone [sic], for the benefit of Plaintiff, His heirs and assigns.
  12. That Plaintiff have such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper, under the full range of relevant circumstances which have occasioned the instant action.

alakedamage

Count Four :

During the Month of August 2016 The Above Racketeering Enterprise through actions of the Raybrook New York Offices of the Empire State’s DEC Agency, a Fraudulent Course of Action was HATCHED to make false Police Reports and to Fraudulently seek Plaintiff Witham’s Arrest and or Confinement for HATCHED, FABRICATED and UNTRUTH Claims that Plaintiff was Threatening some sort of DIRTY BOMB attack upon the Authorities or Environment of New York State.

  1. Said claims where completely, wholly and absolute Gibberish and Nonsense and obviously seriously injurious to the Name and Character of Your Plaintiff. Said false reports were transmitted ACROSS STATE LINES to North Carolina State Police and the Wake County Sheriff’s Office / US Marshal’s Athorities in North Carolina.
  2. The Above efforts to retaliate, interfer with and unlawfully punish Your Plaintiff is directly connected with His efforts to UNCOVER and DIG OUT THE TRUTH in these matters regarding the Hiding and Secreting of Public Records and Files in New York State’s SOLE Custody and Control. Plaintiff’s Rights per the 1st Amendment, FOIL, FOIA and the International Human Rights Laws were TRAMPLED.
  3. The ongoing and continuing practice of WINTER TIME, During Ice and Snow Sheet conditions on Lake George New York are still the Custom, Policy and Practice of the State of New York and It’s Agents, Representatives and Employees. Said Ice Sheet Period Lake Level FLUSHING was the destructive force employed to Destroy Islands, Lake Shore, Boat Houses, Islands and Docks ( like those at The Witham Family Marina ). Said annoual damages are extremely PROFITABLE for the Empire State, The Custom, Policy and Practices associated herewith allow the State to Fund and Practice, Control and Perpetrate the RICO ENTERPRISE upon Lake George, New York as well as throughout the State’s SO CALLED Environmental Conservation / Protection Agencies.
  4. The factual averments associated with Winter Time Ice and Snow Sheet Manipulations ( The WEAPON OF DESTRUCTION ) are described as follows

VI.

Factual Findings, Historical Records and Witness / Evidentiary Records as follows.

  1. Recently Your Plaintiff has come to learn that the Water Release Capacity of the DAM “A” at the exist of Lake George, NY at the La Chute River is only able to release 46% of the water needed to prevent a dangerous and ulawful over topping of the Exit Dam that controls the Ice Sheet Levels on the Lake.
  2. The Lake George Park Commission has publically and many times described the Dam’s inadequacy as has the US Army Corp of Engineers and the Dam Safety Inspection Division of New York State as ” Inadequate ” to properly release Spring Waters from Lake George. New York’s Control of Dam “A ” is conducted in an UNSAFE, DESTRUCTIVE and RECKLESS manner. Said Injurious Dam Operations have been owned and controlled by New York State and It’s Conservation Agencies for some 75+ Years.
  3. In years past for many years in a row, 1960 – 1970 as it relates to the Presnt Case, New York State practices WINTER LAKE DRAWDOWNS during Ice and Snow Sheet Cover because of the Present Dam’s inability to adequately release Spring Run Off or Snow Pack and Ice Sheet Melt and the Spring Rains. This inadequate Dam is less than 1/2 able to handle the Spring Waters. The Pinhole in the Bath Tub is Controlled and Owned by New York State and it’s Corporate Agents, Partners and Representatives.
  4. For many Years the inadequate Dam in the Winter LOWERED the Ice Sheet and Snow on Lake George exerting Many Millions of Pounds of Ice Sheet forces ….. in both Downward and Upward manner upon Clifford and Anita Witham’s Marina at Harris Bay. The Operation and Destructive forces were intentional and were well understood by Your Defendants.
  5. The Witham Family Marina soley because The inadequacy of the State’s Dam and the Reckeless and Intentional Operations to Control Ice Sheet Levels repeatedly destroyed the Witham Marina many times from 1960 – 1970.
  6. The massive destruction of Boat Houses, Docks Bulkheads , Shoreline and Islands has been on account of the MILL POND OPERATIONS which I have recently learned are practiced for ENVIRONMENTAL FLUSHING of Sewage, Leachate and chemicals from Lake George Waters as well as the State maintaining and operating this wholly inadequate Flushing, Drain or Drawdown Facility known as Dam “A ” Dam # 230 on the State’s Dam Safety Inventory.
  7. The State has had knowledge, knew fully well and inaccordance therewith , have with Scienter Operated Their Inadequate Dam and said Operation of it has for many years been and continues to destroy private property on Lake George. The flushing of the contaminates of Lake George are also purposely sent to the La Chute River and Lake Champlain, the Richelieu River and the Saint Lawrence River as New York State’s Environmental Conservation Employees, Commissioners, and Agents and Representatives of New York State perpetuate and continue operations of DUMPING SEWAGE and CHEMICALS Continues ( A Continuing Enterprise and Nuisance )

SEE Unlawful Dumping of Solids, Chemicals and Sewage Wastes into New York, Interstate and International Waters.

SedimentBedTiconderoga

Ocean Dumping Act 33 U.S.C. 1401 33 U.S.C., Chapter 9 – Protection of Navigable Waters 33 U.S.C., Chapter 26 – Clean Water Act 42 U.S.C., Chapter 55 – National Environmental Policy 40 C.F.R. – Protection of Environment

See Also The policy of New York State; set forth in Title 5 of Article 15 of the Environmental Conservation Law (ECL) , is to preserve and protect these lakes, rivers, streams and ponds.

The Continuing Flushing Operations of Lake George, The La Chute River, Lake Champlain, The Richelieu River and the Saint Lawrence are being SECRETED and HIDDEN with an EXCUSE that the DAM “A” The Empire’s Flusher Machine at Lake George is an INADEQUATE INEFFICIENT DAM that must be ANNUALLY FLUSHED on a Continuing Yearly Basis.

  1. The State of New York Your Plaintiff’s Agents, Representatives and Employees have refused to provide records and files per the FOIL LAWS and have Secreted the records in Violation of State and Federal Open Records Laws regarding the Operations of THE PINHOLE in The Bath Tub as described by the Lake George Park Commission and the Empire’s Environmental Conservation Department. Said PIN HOLE …. ( The FLUSHER ) is the Modus Operendi employed to allow the RICO ENTERPRISES to WORK. Without said PIN HOLE and the Fraudulent and Fake, Inadequate Sophistries relating to the FLUSHING of Lake George as herein setforth, The RICO ENTERPRISES are revealled, exposed and said Operations of the RICO Activities becomes INPOSSIBLE to Continue.
  2. Your Defendants have FAILLED IN THEIR DUTIES to advise the Public Generally and Our Family , that it has been the State’s Operations and the State’s Inadequate Dam Causing all the Damages. New York State had a DUTY to inform Your Plaintiff’s of the Damages THEY ALONE CAUSE and They ALONE SECRET.

SEE The Doctrine of Fraudulent Concealment also known as the Doctrine of Concealment.

  1. Said Concealment Doctrine TOLLS the Statutes of Limitations for TORTS resulting from such Negligent and Intentional Operations such as the ANNUAL INTENTIONAL LAKE GEORGE FLUSHINGS and DRAWDOWNS.

VII.

DAMAGES

  1. The Waters of Lake George, The La Chute River, Lake Champlain, The Richelieu River and the Saint Lawrence as well as the Atlantic Ocean have been Contaminated with all kinds of Human and Industrial as well as Agricultural Pollutants in violation of State, Federal and International Laws and Regulations.
  2. As a direct and proximate result The Witham’s Marina Docks and Income Derived therefrom were greatly damaged. The result of that economic damage and loss the Witham’s Lost the Following.
  3. 600 + Acres of Valuable Timber and Minerals real Estate at Harris Bay.
  4. The Witham Family Marina today known as Harris Bay Yacht Club
  5. The Witham Family Home
  6. Use and Enjoyment of the above
  7. Clifford Witham because of the Emotional Stresses and Physical Distress died of a massive heart attack shorty thereafter.
  8. Clifford and Anita Witham’s eldest Son took His Own Life.
  9. Mrs. Anita Witham and the Family suffered significant Financial Deprivation and Public Ridicule and Shame being labeled in the Area as Financial Deadbeats.
  10. The State of New York DEC Divisions of Forests and Lands in a Deal with State Judge Richard Bartlett and DEC Family Members acquired the 600+ acres shortly thereafter.
  11. The Withams suffered a loss of a very valuable Family Asset. Today just ONE of the Docks ( there are 275 of them ) can be purchased for $100,000.00. The 600 acres and the Home and the Marina is at fair market value worth many MILLIONS of Dollars.
  12. The Stream and River Lake Beds of New York, Vermont and Canada have been greatly damaged and are in need of restoration and clean up. All costs and expenses to accomplish a through clean up and reimbursements for Damaged Lake and River Sediments and for the Lake Shore Islands and Docks, Boat Houses both PRIVATE and Public are requested to be paid by the Defendants, Personally, Severally and as Employees of the State Soveriegn as well as Agents for and of The State of New York.
  13. Although at this time UNCALCULATED the Governor of the State of Vermont is Publically calling for more than One Billion Dollars In Clean Up Costs. The total amount to clean all this Environmental Harm and Damages Up will need to be calculated in the future. The total would amount to approximately Three to Five Billion Dollars.
  14. Alakecarmi2011cyanobacteria

—————

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff hereby demands trial by jury on all issues triable to a jury lawfully convened.

The matters of Active and Intentional Concealment of the Unlawful Civil Rights and Constitutional Violations, the Custom. Policy and Practice of the Acts to Aquire Private Property Unlawfully by the Empire State are matters involving Secreting and Concealing Hiding Records and Actions of the Empire by State and Private Actors including Law Enforcement Agents of the New York State Conservation Commission and the current Department of Environmental Conservation Department

VERIFICATION

On this Day 2017 …….. I, Judson B. Witham , Sui Juris, Benificiary and Distributee to the Anita and Clifford Witham Estate, Plaintiff in the above entitled action, and as Private Attorney General and in Qui Tam I hereby verify under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the United States of America, without the “United States” (federal government), that the above statement of facts and laws is true and correct, according to the best of My current information, knowledge, and belief, so help me God, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746(1).

See the Supremacy Clause in the Constitution for the United States of America, as lawfully amended (hereinafter “U.S. Constitution”).

Dated: A.D.

Signed: /s/ Judson B. Witham

___________________________________________

Judson Witham as Private Attorney General , Sui Juris, Whistleblower in Qui Tam and as Private Civil Rights Complainant.

Beautiful_red_fox
Look  at  what  the  INVADING  WHITES   Recorded of  Who Owned the Lands  BEFORE  They the  Whites  STOLE  THEM  ALL
500  Years  of  Racketeering for  Land  and  Natural  Resources  FACTS  are  STUBBORN  Things

Son of The Swamp Fox

All rights  reserved 

alakedamage

 

%d bloggers like this: