Motion for Criminal Referral to the U.S. Attorney Kansas City, Kansas 10th District January 7, 2010 ref Civil Case No: 09-2603-cv-02603-FJG
Motion for Criminal Referral to the U.S. Attorney Kansas City, Missouri 8th District January 7, 2010 ref Civil Case No: 09-2603-cv-02603-FJG
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
STEWART A. WEBB
v. Civil Case No: 09-2603-cv-02603-FJG
HON. JUDGE KATHRYN H. VRATIL, in her
Official capacity as Chief Judge
for the United States District Court
the District of Kansas
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
Official Notice 18 U.S.C. 4 Federal Reporting Crimes Act
Motion for Criminal Referral to the United States Attorneys
Comes now the plaintiff Stewart A. Webb appearing pro se and makes the following Motion for Criminal Referral based on undisputable facts and controlling law.
Plaintiff Stewart Webb wishes to notice the Court, Court Clerks and the United States Attorneys for Kansas City, Kansas Lanny D. Welch United States Attorney for The District of Kansas. 500 State Ave. Suite 360. Kansas City, KS 66101 and Kansas City, Missouri Beth Phillips U.S. Attorney For The Western District of Missouri Office Room 5510 400 East 9th Street Kansas City, Missouri 64106 and the Kansas City FBI Office firstname.lastname@example.org that it would be a MISPRISION OF FELONY under 18 USC 4 to fail to disclose felonious acts that have been witnessed by or that have come to the attention of the Plaintiff.
Plaintiff and others are also aware that Numerous Felonies have been committed by some of the named and unnamed defendants and Co-Conspirators.
The plaintiff submits the following with evidence useful for determining that this action is not frivolous and that admissible evidence is available to assert the Plaintiff Stewart A. Webb Motion for Criminal Referral to The U.S. Attorneys in both Kansas City, Kansas and Kansas City, Missouri, and the Kansas City Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).
There would be no fee required for a Criminal Referral to the U.S. Attorney’s Office and this Criminal Referral is not frivolous because there is evidence of Felonies Committed as the proof of these Felonies are in the Plaintiff’s Corrected Memorandum for Summary Judgment and Motion for Summary Judgment with attachments.
See Exhibits: on google below
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The continuing violations and the over arching goal of the RICO conspiracy have been researched and recorded as they occurred up to and including November 25, 2009 the date the plaintiff filed in this court for relief in equity to obtain legal counsel in the course of the plaintiffs business in preparation to present evidence and testimony of numerous witnesses to a US District Court for the District of Colorado Grand Jury in
Webb v. Millman, et al. Cr. Div. Case No. 95Y107. Assigned to U.S. District Court Judge Richard P. Matsch.
The Hon. Judge Fernando J. Gaitan Jr.‟s determination of mootness of the plaintiff‟s Motion for Summary Judgment and memorandum of controlling law supported by over 80 factual exhibits which cannot be frivolous and entitles the plaintiff to the relief he seeks and was unopposed by the defendants.
The memorandum in support of the plaintiff‟s motion for summary judgment specifically gave Hon. Judge Fernando J. Gaitan Jr. evidence of federal felony crimes being committed by State of Kansas officials to violate Civil Rights and injury to similarly situated individuals who were retaliated against through extrinsic fraud over federal court proceedings to meet the burden of proving the 1st and 2nd criteria for injunctive relief under Kansas Hospital Association v. Whiteman, 835 F. Supp. 1548,
1551-2 (D.Kan. 1993).
The plaintiff will show infra under the competency of the evidence used to disbar Bret D. Landrith that the State of Kansas disbarment was procured through extrinsic fraud.
The plaintiff will show infra under the competency of the evidence used to disbar Bret D. Landrith that the present defendants the defendants the Hon. Chief Judge Kathryn H. Vratil, and the Kansas District Court participated and in some instances caused the procurement of the state disbarment through extrinsic fraud on the Kansas Supreme Court.
The plaintiff will show infra under the competency of the evidence used to disbar Bret D. Landrith that the present defendants the defendants the Hon. Chief Judge Kathryn H. Vratil, and the Kansas District Court through extrinsic fraud caused an ethics panel of the Kansas District Court including the Hon. Judge J. Thomas Marten to reciprocally disbar Bret D. Landrith in the absence of a hearing and contrary to controlling law.
The public interest in other jurisdictions including the State of Kansas, the US District Court for the Western District of Missouri, the US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, The US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, The US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit and the US Supreme Court have been injured by the defendants the Hon. Chief Judge Kathryn H. Vratil, and the Kansas District Court (“KDC”).
All resulting inconveniences that may be suffered by the Hon. Chief Judge Kathryn H. Vratil, and the Kansas District Court as a result of granting the proposed injunctive relief arise solely from the upholding of federal law and the US Constitution against trespass on the rights of the plaintiff and the plaintiff’s right to access to the courts.
The plaintiff will show infra that upholding the public interest in undoing extrinsic fraud injuring the enforcement of federal laws can result in no legally recognizable counter interest or estate of Hon. Chief Judge Kathryn H. Vratil, and the Kansas District Court in the benefits of obtained from the fraud.
The plaintiff will provide legal authority in his memorandum of law that the legislated public policy interest was injured by the disbarment of Bret D. Landrith.
The plaintiff will provide legal authority in his memorandum of law that the unlawful disbarment of Bret D. Landrith has resulted in a State of Kansas policy that is being used to unlawfully injure more Kansas attorneys in a way that creates a grave danger that the plaintiff and the Citizens of the States including Kansas will be injured in their federally protected rights by racketeering schemes violating 18 U. S. C. § 1961, et seq. and the Bush Millman Linder Crime Syndicate specifically.
The plaintiff will provide legal authority in his memorandum of law that the violation of a criminal statute is at law a violation of the legislated public policy interest.
The presentation of evidence of criminal wrongdoing to the US Government via a grand jury or as a False Claims Act relator furthers the public interest. (See below request to transfer Grand Jury to Kansas City, Kansas)
The presentation of evidence of criminal wrongdoing meeting the elements of enumerated racketeering violations under 18 U. S. C. § 1961 Congress has created a private right of action to redress as claims under 18 U. S. C. § 1961 furthers the public interest.
The public interest has been injured in Bolden v. City of Topeka, KDC Case No. 02-2635-KHV when the Hon. Chief Judge Kathryn H. Vratil was the trier of fact but did not reveal to Bolden or his replacement counsel that she had procured the disbarment of his replacement counsel through extrinsic fraud.
See exhibit. 2 Procedural History of Lipari v US Bank.
The gravamen of the defendant Hon. Chief Judge Kathryn H. Vratil against Bolden is the fact he had such great difficulty obtaining representation until Landrith took his appeal. See Bolden KDC case management hearing before Magistrate James O’Hara:
The public interest in having impartial federal and state courts resolve issues regarding the law has been injured by the defendants’ failure to uphold federal statutes on behalf of pro se parties and is now causing the exercise of popular sovereignty in the form of a petition to the State of Kansas Legislature that could have the effect of requiring the removal from office of Kansas State Representatives and Senators that fail to act to free David Martin Price under Kansas State Statutes applying to public officials.
See exhibit 3
The Chief Justice of the Missouri Supreme Court addressed hundreds of attorneys, judges and court employees and demanded an end to predetermined court cases after Bret Landrith’s former client and successor in interest Samuel K. Lipari’s repeated appeal efforts in Jackson County 16th Circuit Court of Missouri and the fate of Lipari’s claims serving the interest of Missouri State Law removed to the US District Court for the District of Kansas.
See exhibit 4 Speech of Missouri Chief Justice.
The US Senator of Missouri Claire McCaskill responded to a constituent request by Landrith seeking to obtain information about being able to practice in federal courts after unlawfully being disbarred for successfully representing an African American in a Civil Rights Case.
See exhibit 5 Letter of Landrith to McCaskill.
The US Senator of Missouri Claire McCaskill instructed Landrith to file ethics complaints against the judges ordering the disbarment.
See exhibit 6 Letter of Senator Claire McCaskill to Landrith.
The US Senator of Missouri Claire McCaskill was subsequently chosen to chair a Senate Committee to prosecute the removal from office of the Impeached Judge Samuel B. Kent.
See exhibit 7 St. Louis Times Article on Senator Claire McCaskill’s appointment to impeachment committee.
The aid to public interest that would result in granting the injunction
The plaintiff can write charging documents to the very low standard a government prosecuting attorney such as a US Attorney is held to in a criminal information.
The plaintiff cannot write a Civil RICO complaint, anticipating the sham Rule 12(b)(6) Motions to the standard even a pro se litigant will be held to in a federal court.
This court ruled that Landrith’s amended petition against a Bush Millman Lindner RICO Enterprise pattern Ponzi was sufficient to be served on the defendants.
See exhibit 8 Cremeen v,, Bank of America et al. KDC No. 04-02519-GTC-DJW
Key evidence of Numerous Felonies Committed by Kansas State Officials and Gale Larkin
Key evidence of Numerous Felonies lie in the Illegal Disbarment of Attorney Bret Landrith using Gale Larkin, The Kansas Displinary Office. Gale Larkin got Three Attorney’s to lie to Disbar Bret Landrith and Keep Donna Huffman from Obtaining her Law License as evidence in Plaintiff Stewart A. Webb’s Corrected Memoradum in Support of Summary Judgment and Plaintiff Motion for Summary Judgment.
Exhibit Plaintiff Memorandum for Summary Judgment:
120. On November 13, 2009 The Kansas Supreme Court ruled that Donna Huffman had
the character and fitness to take the bar exam reversing the majority determination of the
Kansas Attorney Discipline Office and the Arguments of Kansas Attorney Discipline
Prosecutor Gail Larkin that had kept Donna Huffman from taking over six attorney Bar
See exhibit: Motion for Summary Judgment and Corrected Memorandum in Support of Summary Judgment.
See Exhibits: on google
The Below Links are additional Evidence for Criminal Referral 18 U.S.C. 4 Federal Reporting Crime Act
The most recent outline and summary of the 18 U. S. C. § 1961enumerated predicate criminal acts committed by identified members of the Bush Millman Lindner RICO Enterprise and its RICO Co-Conspirators is viewable as a criminal information or charging document to be submitted to the District of Colorado Grand Jury at
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
September 14, 2009 Case No: 95-Y-107 Grand Jury Demand
Assigned to Honorable Judge Richard P. Matsch
The reason the Plaintiff Stewart Webb asked for a transfer of his Federal Grand Jury Demand to Kansas City, Kansas are twofold.
1. For Witness Convenience and the constant Obstruction of Justice in the Clerk and US Attorney’s offices in Denver Colorado to keep from having this open Grand Jury Case from being heard, which the Plaintiff Stewart Webb has proof to these allegations including Bribes paid to Judges and Prosecutors in that District by the Bush-Millman RICO Enterprise.
2. That the Plaintiff has learned that United States District Court Judge Richard P. Matsch is probable intimidated, scared for his life to uphold the Law since Judge Matsch’s Daughter was Murdered by the same named in Plaintiff’s Grand Jury Filing and Demand to present evidence and witnesses of Treason , Sedition, Narcotics Importation into the United States, False Claims against The United States Treasury, Murders committed by said Defendants, Narcotics Money Laundering, Weapons Sales in Violation of The Barkley Cole Indenture Act, including False Claims against the United States Treasury in the recent Bank Bail Out Scam, Frauds Upon The Courts and Interfering in Federal Investigations to Obstruct Justice among many other Federal Law Violations as stated in Plaintiff Stewart A. Webb’s Grand Jury Demand.
See link below:
Congressional Investigators Letter to Stew Webb Federal Whistleblower
Stew Webb Savings and Loan Whistleblower Faces False Charges and Dismissed with Prejudice
Mr. Timothy M. O’Brien
Clerk Of Court
Robert J. Dole Courthouse
500 State Ave.
259 U.S. Courthouse
Kansas City, Kansas 66101
September 14, 2009
RE: US Grand Jury Proceeding Webb v. Millman, et al. Cr. Div. Case No. 95Y107
Dear Mr. O’Brien,
I am writing to inform you that I am seeking to change a Grand Jury situs from the US District Court for the District of Colorado to the Kansas District Court building at 500 State Avenue. This request is being made of Senior Colorado District Judge, Hon. Richard P. Matsch
I understand the Robert J. Dole Courthouse has a US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit courtroom, which would facilitate the presentation of witnesses and evidence in the above captioned matter.
I am planning to finish preparing the initial evidence by September 22nd and I anticipate that a little over three weeks will be required. I understand that some days might be blocked out as your courtroom is used for Tenth Circuit and Kansas State Appeals functions and I believe we will be able to accommodate the interruptions.
Please let me know of any changes in the courtrooms schedule or demands of your staff handling jury matters and I will attempt to adjust my plans accordingly. I will keep you informed so that you might know at the earliest moment when to empanel prospective grand jurors.
S/Stewart Anthony Webb
Stewart Anthony Webb
Pro se Federal Whistleblower
S/Stewart Anthony Webb
Respectfully submitted to The United States Attorneys for Criminal Referral,
S/Stewart Anthony Webb
25 Years a Federal Whistleblower
Mail: P.O. Box 3061
Independence, MO. 64055
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certified I have served the above motion on opposing parties by filing the Motion for Criminal Referral January 7th, 2010 on the courts electronic filing system and by email filings to
I further certified I have served the Motion for Criminal Referral by US Mail
containing a link to an html or pdf version of the same available online at
to the following by depositing it in the US Mail with First Class postage affixed:
U.S. Attorney's Office
400 East 9th Street
Kansas City, MO 64106
U.S. President Barack Obama
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20530
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
Lanny D. Welch
United States Attorney
For The District of Kansas.
Kansas City 500 State Ave. Suite 360.
Kansas City, KS 66101
Phone (913) 551-6730
Thomas E. Perez
Assistant Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Office of the Assistant Attorney General, Main
Washington, D.C. 20530
Phone (202) 514-4609
Fax (202) 514-0293
James C. Duff
Director of the Administrative Office
Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts
One Columbus Circle NE
Washington, D.C. 20544
Phone (202) 502-2600
S/ Stewart A. Webb
Stewart A. Webb
Pro se Federal Whistleblower