Source: https://poisonedbymyneighborfromhell.com/tag/public-corruption/
Timestamp: 2019-04-18 16:16:31+00:00

Document:
Letter from US Attorney based on misinformation.
I have never claimed my damages occurred in 2003-2005, that is when the illegal property redevelopment was going on. My allegations of conspiracy against rights and deprivation of rights under color of law began in 2005 with the most recent occurring in April 2017. If anyone actually felt they had a duty to actually read my complaint there would be no mistaking of timelines. But in this case we rely on what someone who was not interested in the first place tell their version of the story to a third party. That is hearsay, which is not evidence that is allowed in court or in any reasonable investigation. Mr. VanderSchel, how about I send a copy of my complaint directly to you. You read the entire complaint and then you may be more able to base a decision on what the complaint states. Your information is incorrect. I should not have to continue to beg for justice based on people being misinformed as to that the evidence supports.
I contacted Senator Grassley in 2007, he forwarded my information to the FBI. Are you telling me it has taken 11 years for my case to get from the Senator to the hands of the US attorney and the information is not based on the information in the written complaint I submitted to the local FBI agent. This local agent told me 3 different versions of what would happen after I submitted my complaint to him. I do not have any evidence that he even submitted my written complaint. I have evidence that the most recent act of conspiracy happened in April 2017 well within the statute of limitations. I have not been negligent in anyway of not submitting timely complaints. How in the hell does it take 11 years for a complaint to get from a Senator to a US Attorney.
Somebody has some splanin to do. Where is the written complaint I submitted to the local FBI?
Conspiracy is a continuing offense. For statutes such as 18 U.S.C. § 371, which require an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy, the statute of limitations begins to run on the date of the last overt act. See Fiswick v. United States, 329 U.S. 211 (1946); United States v. Butler, 792 F.2d 1528 (11th Cir. 1986). For conspiracy statutes which do not require proof of an overt act, such as RICO (18 U.S.C. § 1961) or 21 U.S.C. § 846, the government must allege and prove that the conspiracy continued into the limitations period. The crucial question in this regard is the scope of the conspiratorial agreement, and the conspiracy is deemed to continue until its purpose has been achieved or abandoned. See United States v. Northern Imp. Co., 814 F.2d 540 (8th Cir. 1987); United States v. Coia, 719 F.2d 1120 (11th Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 973 (1984).
An individual’s “withdrawal” from a conspiracy starts the statute of limitations running as to that individual. “Withdrawal” from a conspiracy for this purpose means that the conspirator must take affirmative action by making a clean breast to the authorities or communicating his or her disassociation to the other conspirators. See United States v. Gonzalez, 797 F.2d 915 (10th Cir. 1986).
The letter stated that the statute of limitations has expired. WHAT? I contact Senator Grassley in 2007. I have been complaining the last several years that the timeliness is unacceptable. Seems the US Attorney is just recently getting my complaint. I am sorry but I am not responsible for any statute of limitations expiring in this case. Whoever received it from Senator Grassley is responsible for any mishandling of my case. A case that is unprecedented. A case in which the most brutal means of attack were used. Chemical weapons were used with intent to cause serious injury or death. They did cause serious lifelong injury and had I not fled I would be dead. If I would have done this to another human being I would be in prison the rest of my life. How can the statute of limitations be expired if the FBI was investigating this case appropriately? Who is the victim of mishandling of a complaint. I am. So what now. I have followed all the proper procedures, except during the time I was blind and unable to function normally. I could not get my vision restored until 2012. I could not read. This is really a disappointment, I thought my case was being investigated all this time, but it seems the US Attorney is just recently getting my complaint. Come on now, this is unacceptable. Senator Grassley will hopefully deal with incompetence. He supports whistleblowers and exposing corruption. I hope he gets to the root of the problem with my case. The evidence supports all my allegations, the perps implicate themselves on public record. What could go wrong?
In my case it is the City and County officials who conspired against my Federally protected rights. It is the local law enforcement who deprived my of my Federally protected rights under color of law. So if the FBI works closely with local law enforcement agencies there is no doubt some locals will be lying to the Feds. They cannot work closely with the local law enforcement if they are going to expose local public corruption in my City and County.
To establish a uniform and more efficient Federal process for protecting property owners’ rights guaranteed by the fifth amendment.
This Act may be cited as the “Defense of Property Rights Act”.
(13) section 1500 of title 28, United States Code, which denies the Court of Federal Claims jurisdiction to entertain a suit which is pending in another court and made by the same plaintiff, should be repealed.
(5) require the Federal Government and States to compensate compensation to property owners for the deprivation of property rights.
(ii) an action filed by the United States relating to criminal forfeiture.
SEC. 5. COMPENSATION FOR TAKEN PROPERTY.
(E) under any other circumstance where a taking has occurred within the meaning of the fifth amendment of the United States Constitution.
(C) subsection (a)(2)(C), with regard to showing that such deprivation of value inheres in the title to the property.
(2) The property owner shall have the burden of proof in any action described under subsection (a)(2)(D), with regard to establishing the diminution of value of property.
SEC. 6. JURISDICTION AND JUDICIAL REVIEW.
(a) In General.—A property owner may file a civil action under this Act to challenge the validity of any agency action that adversely affects the owner’s interest in private property in either the United States District Court or the United States Court of Federal Claims. This section constitutes express waiver of the sovereign immunity of the United States. Notwithstanding any other provision of law and notwithstanding the issues involved, the relief sought, or the amount in controversy, each court shall have concurrent jurisdiction over both claims for monetary relief and claims seeking invalidation of any Act of Congress or any agency action defined under this Act affecting private property rights. The plaintiff shall have the election of the court in which to file a claim for relief.
(b) Standing.—Persons adversely affected by an agency action taken under this Act shall have standing to challenge and seek judicial review of that action.
“(4) In cases otherwise within its jurisdiction, the Court of Federal Claims shall also have ancillary jurisdiction, concurrent with the courts designated in section 1346(b) of this title, to render judgment upon any related tort claim authorized under section 2674 of this title.
“(5) In proceedings within the jurisdiction of the Court of Federal Claims which constitute judicial review of agency action (rather than de novo proceedings), the provisions of section 706 of title 5 shall apply.”.
(2) (A) Section 1500 of title 28, United States Code, is repealed.
(B) The table of sections for chapter 91 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by striking out the item relating to section 1500.
SEC. 7. STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.
The statute of limitations for actions brought under this title shall be 6 years from the date of the taking of property.
SEC. 8. ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS.
The court, in issuing any final order in any action brought under this Act, shall award costs of litigation (including reasonable attorney and expert witness fees) to any prevailing plaintiff.
SEC. 9. ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION.
(3) in no event shall arbitration be a condition precedent or an administrative procedure to be exhausted before the filing of a civil action under this Act.
(b) Review Of Arbitration.—Appeal from arbitration decisions shall be to the United States District Court or the United States Court of Federal Claims in the manner prescribed by law for the claim under this Act.
SEC. 10. RULES OF CONSTRUCTION.
Nothing in this Act shall be construed to interfere with the authority of any State to create additional property rights.
The provisions of this Act shall apply to actions commenced on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.

References: § 371
 v. 
 v. 
 § 1961
 § 846
 v. 
 v. 
 v.