AFFIDAVIT
OF ALBERT L. PEIA
I, Albert L. Peia,
residing in Los Angeles, in the State of California, of full age and being duly
sworn according to law, hereby state the following facts of my own knowledge
under penalty of perjury as follows:
1. At all times
relevant hereto, U.S. GOVERNMENT
CO-CONSPIRATORS /EMPLOYEES (CURRENT AND FORMER - JUDICIAL, LEGISLATIVE, AND
EXECUTIVE)WITH KNOWLEDGE OF CRIMINAL ACTS SET FORTH
HEREIN, acted in violation of federal statutes in furtherance of said criminal
acts, to obstruct justice, obstruct criminal investigations thereof, retaliate
against a witness/victim/informant, commit fraud in cases under Title 11,
U.S.C., among other criminal acts set forth with specificity hereinafter.
Calls To
Defendants Coan, Lewendon,
and Miltonberger
I Stated that I Needed Information For
Purpose of A Proper Affidavit Concerning the following which was articulated to
a secretary, by voicemail, and to Timothy Miltonberger
in a phone conference as set forth hereinafter.
The precise areas that I indicated I believed a court would want to see
in such an affidavit given the totality of circumstances (particularly the
criminal activity, RICO among other) in this case were articulated to
secretarial personnel as messages to be relayed to Miltonberger,
voicemail messages to Miltonberger, and in a
conversation with Timothy Miltonberger himself , who referred to defendant coan
as his “client” (not “partner”) are as follows:
·
The status of the judgment
entered in my favor on or around 9-19-97 by Judge Thompson, United States
District Court, District of Connecticut, Docket #3:93cv2065(AWT), copy of which
is annexed hereto as Exhibit “A”;
·
As referenced in the 12-11-97 telephonic examination (I was at the Los
Angeles, California office of what I believe was the bankruptcy trustee for
this California district – defendant coan was in
Connecticut), the status of the David George Swann (DOB: 4-6-60 / self-admitted
junkie who had 4 guilty pleas to theft in less than 5 years in California)
matter, which was ripe for default and/or
judgment, [I had joined the trustee coan as
plaintiff and indicated Swann’s familiarity with theft as was so of my
business/personal assets making time of the essence in proceeding for recovery
(replevin and damages the remedies sought). Defendant
coan purposefully/wrongfully had the bankruptcy court
dismiss same at the hearing on default saying he would decide whether to bring
same];
·
Anything regarding the Adversary
Proceedings which were ripe for the entry of default/default judgment, assets,
surplus funds yet unaccounted for, which defendant coan
wrongfully/illegally caused dismissal thereof, Exhibit B page1
page2;
·
Anything regarding the disposition of the contents of
the storage unit in Danbury, Connecticut
(including as related in the 12-11-97 telephonic examination what
remained of my art collection which I indicated
had probably gone up in value);
·
Whether there were any criminal
proceedings/referrals for the documented RICO among other criminal acts (which
coincidentally caused me damages/harm/injury).
Not surprisingly, given the integral
involvement of said defendants in the criminal activity as herein, no response,
clarification, or explanation was forthcoming. The details concerning the calls
are set forth immediately hereinafter:
1-5-04
I initiated my first call to Coan, Lewendon, Gulliver, & Miltonberger subsequent to the action of the U.S. Supreme
Court, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, and the U.S. District Court for the
District of Connecticut, all violative of RICO,
having given defendant Coan and subject defendants
time to cure, in light of their illegal coverup. I
asked to speak with Timothy Miltonberger and was told
by the receptionist that he was not in. I gave my name and phone number and
further stated I would call back on Friday,
January 9, 2004.
1-9-04 I called back on January 9, 2004, was told he
was not in, was asked whether I wanted to leave a voicemail message, to which I
responded that I needed to speak to him personally concerning an affidavit I
would be filing with the court, and set forth the subject areas of concern in
such an affidavit. I gave my name and phone number and further stated I
would call back on Friday, January 16,
2004.
1-16-04 I called back on January 16, 2004,
was told he was not in, was asked whether
I wanted to leave a voicemail message, to which I responded that I
needed to speak to him personally
concerning an affidavit I would be filing with the court, and set forth the
subject areas of concern in such an affidavit. I gave my name and phone
number and further stated I would call back on Friday, January 23, 2004.
1-23-04 I called back on January 23, 2004, was told
he was not in, was asked whether I
wanted to leave a voicemail message, to which I responded that I needed to
speak to him personally concerning an
affidavit I would be filing with the court, and referenced the prior
articulated subject areas of concern for such an affidavit. I gave my
name and phone number and further stated I would call back on Friday, January 30, 2004.
1-30-04 I called back on January 30, 2004, was told he was not in, and immediately
transferred to Timothy Miltonberger’s voicemail
wherein I referenced the prior message which the receptionist had indicated had
been given to Mr. Miltonberger and briefly reiterated
those subject areas of concern for the affidavit.
2-2-04 I called back on February 2, 2004, was told there had been some kind of a
power problem by one who identified herself as a new receptionist, Lisa, and
that Timothy Miltonberger had been called into a
meeting. I gave my name and phone number and further stated I would call
back on Friday, February 6, 2004.
2-6-04 I called back on February 6, 2004, no one was in and at the prompt I left a
voicemail message wherein I referenced the prior messages which the
receptionist had indicated had been given to Mr. Miltonberger
and briefly reiterated those subject areas of concern for the affidavit.
2-13-04 I called back on February 13, 2004 and had occasion to speak with Mr. Miltonberger.
I Stated that I Needed Information For
Purpose of A Proper Affidavit and articulated the precise areas that I
indicated I believed a court would want to see in such an affidavit given the
totality of circumstances (particularly the criminal activity, RICO among
other) in this case as follows:
·
The status of the judgment
entered in my favor on or around 9-19-97 by Judge Thompson, United States
District Court, District of Connecticut, Docket #3:93cv2065(AWT), copy of which
is annexed hereto as Exhibit “A”;
·
As referenced in the 12-11-97 telephonic examination (I was at the Los
Angeles, California office of what I believe was the bankruptcy trustee for
this California district – defendant coan was in
Connecticut), the status of the David George Swann (DOB: 4-6-60 / self-admitted
junkie who had 4 guilty pleas to theft in less than 5 years in California)
matter, which was ripe for default and/or
judgment, [I had joined the trustee coan as
plaintiff and indicated Swann’s familiarity with theft as was so of my
business/personal assets making time of the essence in proceeding for recovery
(replevin and damages the remedies sought). Defendant
coan purposefully/wrongfully had the bankruptcy court
dismiss same at the hearing on default saying he would decide whether to bring
same];
·
Anything regarding the Adversary
Proceedings which were ripe for the entry of default/default judgment, assets,
surplus funds yet unaccounted for, which defendant coan
wrongfully/illegally caused dismissal thereof, Exhibit B;
·
Anything regarding the disposition of the contents of
the storage unit in Danbury, Connecticut
(including as related in the 12-11-97 telephonic examination what
remained of my art collection which I indicated
had probably gone up in value);
·
Whether there were any criminal
proceedings/referrals for the documented RICO among other criminal acts (which
coincidentally caused me damages/harm/injury).
In
this phone contact with Miltonberger for which I
meticulously made record of his response to my statement of Judge Chatigny, U.S.D.C.J., District of Connecticut, having
incorporated in his decision my stated intent to sue defendant coan for which no prior leave of court was to be necessary, Timothy Miltonberger responded that same was his recollection as
well, although contrary to the position
he had taken in papers filed on behalf of defendant coan,
his “client/partner”.
.
I gave my phone number and further stated I would call back on Friday, February 20, 2004.
2-20-04
I called back on February
20, 2004 and was
told to call back on Monday, February 23, 2004.
2-23-04
I called back on February
23, 2004, and was
told that Mr. Miltonberger was not in and I
gave my phone number and further stated I would call back on Friday, February 27, 2004.
2-27-04 I called back on February 27, 2004, was told he was not in, and I
gave my name and phone number for a return call and further stated I would call
back on Friday, March 5, 2004 at the same time.
3-05-04 I called back on March 5, 2004, and was told that Mr. Miltonberger
was not in and that they did not know
when he would be back I gave my
phone number and further stated I would call back on Friday, March 12, 2004 at
the same time.
3-12-04 I called back on March 12, 2004, was told he was not in and that he would
not be returning for the rest of the day. I gave my name and phone
number for a return call and further stated I would call back in one week on Friday, March 19, 2004 and that I
needed a response.
3-19-04
I called back on March
19, 2004, was told
he was on the line and that I should call back in about an hour. I gave
my name and phone number for a return call and further stated I would call back
in about an hour. I called back a bit over an hour later, was told Mr. Miltonberger was on the line, and stated that I would hold
for him. Mr. Miltonberger finally picked up and
related to me that his client had not gotten back to him, to which I responded
that I would call back in one week.
3-26-04
I called Timothy Miltonberger on March 26, 2004, was told he was on the line and that I
should call back in about twenty minutes. I gave my name and phone
number for a return call and further stated I would call back accordingly. I
called back about twenty minutes later, was told Mr. Miltonberger
was on the line, and to call him back on Monday or Tuesday in the afternoon, to
which I responded affirmatively.
3-29-04 I called Timothy Miltonberger on March
29, 2004, was told
he was in court. I gave my name and phone number for a return call and further
stated I would call back
on Friday, April 2, 2004.
4-2-04
I called Timothy Miltonberger on April 2, 2004 and was told he was not answering his line. I
gave my name and phone number for a return call, also left my new P.O. Box (P.O.
Box 862156, Los Angeles, CA
90086) and further stated I
would call back on Monday, April 5,
2004.
4-5-04 I called Timothy Miltonberger
on April 5, 2004, and was told he was not in, and to
try calling him on Thursday, 4-8-04. I gave my name and phone number for a return call and further
stated I would call back on Thursday,
April 8, 2004.
4-8-04 I called Timothy Miltonberger
on April 8, 2004,
was told he was in conference and to call him back Friday, April 16, 2004, to which I responded
affirmatively.
4-16-04
I called back on April
16, 2004 and was
told he was not in. I left my name and phone number for a return call
and further stated I would call back in one week on Friday, April
23, 2004 and that I needed a response.
4-23-04
I called Timothy Miltonberger on April 23, 2004 and was told he had stepped out and in
response to my query stated he would be back in 15-20 minutes. I called back in
about 25 minutes and was told he was not anwering his
line. I gave my name and phone number for a return call, also left my P.O. Box (P.O.
Box 862156, Los Angeles, CA
90086) and further stated I
would call back on Friday, April 30,
2004 and that I needed a response.
4-30-04 I called back on April 30, 2004, and was immediately transferred to Timothy Miltonberger’s voicemail wherein I referenced the prior
messages which the receptionist had indicated had been given to Mr. Miltonberger, which I had discussed with him, and as well,
left as voicemail messages,
briefly referencing those subject areas of concern for the
affidavit. I further stated the need for a response for the affidavit, that a
resolution of the matter would be wise in light of the substantial illegal
activities (of defendants/co-conspirators), that I had diligently kept a record
of my calls, and that I would call back in one week.
5-7-04
I called Timothy Miltonberger on May 7, 2004 and was told he had left for the day. I
left my name and phone number for a return call, also left my P.O. Box (P.O.
Box 862156, Los Angeles, CA
90086) and that I needed a
response.
5-10-04
I called Timothy Miltonberger on May 10, 2004 and was told he was out to lunch. I stated
that I would call back on Friday, 5-14-04, that I had already begun drafting
the papers and that it would take some time and hopefully the matter would
resolve, that this was never about being litigious but rather about protecting
my interests, and that this would get very nasty (in light of the substantial
illegal/fraudulent acts by defendants/co-conspirators). I left my name
and phone number for a return call, and also left my P.O. Box (P.O.
Box 862156, Los Angeles, CA
90086).
5-14-04 I called Timothy Miltonberger
on May 14, 2004
and was told he was out to lunch. I stated that I had already begun drafting
the papers and that their insurer and surety would be John Doe defendants, but
that hopefully the matter would resolve since it would be in the best interests
of the parties . I left my name and phone
number for a return call, and also left my P.O. Box (P.O.
Box 862156, Los Angeles, CA
90086).
Inclusion of Defendant Coan’s (Professional
Liability/Errors
and Omissions/Malpractice) Insurer and Surety As
John Doe Defendants
In or around 1997, I became aware of the
existence of such coverage, though not the precise details of same.
Specific Crimes of U.S. Government
Employees/Contractors/Agents,
Judicial, Legislative, and Executive
The Illegal
Drug-Money-Laundering Through the trump Casinos
Direct U.S. Government/CIA Involvement in the
Illegal Drug/
Illegal
Drug-Money-Laundering Business
William Barr
George H,W. Bush
William Jefferson
Clinton
2nd Circuit FBI Agent Affidavit Under Penalty of Perjury Attesting to CIA Involvement in Illegal Drug
Trade Among Other Crimes page1
page2
. U.S. Senators Arlen Spector,
John Kerry,
Charles Schumer, among others are apprised. A copy of said affidavit is
annexed hereto and incorporated herein by reference thereto.
CIA Agent Declaration Under Penalty
of Perjury Attesting to the
Involvement of the Central Intelligence Agency, Drug Enforcement
Administration, the armed forces of the United States, among others, in the illegal drug business page1
page2
.
William Barr
George H,W. Bush
William Jefferson
Clinton
are named as involved, along with Manuel
Noriega, Mike Harrari (Israeli “mossad”),
Joe Fernandez, Oliver North, Buddy Young, Felix Rodriguez, and General Gustavo Alverez.
Specific Crimes of U.S.
Government
Employees/Contractors/Agents: Judicial,
Legislative, and Executive
Federal Employees
u.s. Federal judges:
It should noted and emphasized theat there is no immunity, judicial or otherwise, under the laws as presently written in the u.s. that insulates judges from culpability for their criminal acts.
maryanne
trump barry,
judge, 3rd Circuit u.s.
Court of Appeals (former u.s.d.c.j., District of new
jersey)
RICO
- bribery
- money laundering (conspiracy)
- Obstruction of Justice
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
(samuel alito,
former u.s.
Attorney for the District of new jersey also now sits on this panel)
RICO
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
alan shiff, u.s. Bankrupcy Court judge, District of Connecticut
RICO
- Fraud Connected With A Case Under Title 11
- Retaliating Against A Witness, Victim, Or Informant
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
j. howard matz, u.s.
District Court judge, Central District of California
RICO
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
peter c.
dorsey, u.s.
District Court judge, District of Connecticut
RICO
- Fraud Connected With A Case Under Title 11
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
All nine members of the u.s. supreme court
RICO
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
3 Judge panel, 2nd
Circuit Court of Appeals
RICO
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
3 Judge panel, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals
RICO
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
u.s. Attorneys General:
William Barr,
RICO
- bribery
- money laundering (conspiracy)
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
Janet Reno,
RICO
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
John Ashcroft
RICO
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
u.s. Attorneys:
samuel
alito, former u.s.
Attorney for the District of new jersey
RICO
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
christopher
droney former u.s. Attorney for the District of
Connecticut,
RICO
- Bribery
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
alejandro
mayorkas, former u.s.
Attorney for the Central District of California
RICO
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
Assistant u.s. Attorneys:
jonathon
lacey, former assistant u.s. attorney, District of new jersey
RICO
- Bribery
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
robert
lester, assistant u.s. attorney, Central District
of California
RICO
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
deidre
martini, assistant u.s. attorney,
District of Connecticut
RICO
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
john hughes, assistant u.s.
attorney, District of Connecticut
RICO
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
ann nevins, assistant u.s. attorney, District of Connecticut
RICO
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
John Durham, assistant u.s. attorney, District
of Connecticut
RICO
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
Office of the United States Solicitor General (clinton administration)
Office of the United States Solicitor General
Theodore Olson*
*It is with great reluctance that I am constrained to include reference to Mr. Olsen who I understand to be leaving the Office of Solicitor General in August, 2004. Indeed, I offer my belated condolences in light of his substantial loss. Mrs. Olsen, for whom I had the highest personal regard, was beautiful, gifted, smart, and a consummate author/criminal-clinton-critic. However, he was in receipt of the cd accepted for filing by the 2nd circuit court of appeals and which contained documentary evidence of the crimes which are the gravamen of the instant case.
u.s. Trustees:
hugh
leonard, former u.s.
Trustee for the District of new jersey
RICO
- bribery
- money laundering (conspiracy)
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
(patricia
schneider, district of Connecticut – involvement
minimal)
u.s. Contractors/Trustees
richard
m. coan
RICO
- Fraud Connected With A Case Under Title 11
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Negligence
- Breach of Fiduciary Duty
- Misprision of Felony
whitney
lewendon
RICO
- Fraud Connected With A Case Under Title 11
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
timothy miltonberger
RICO
- Fraud Connected With A Case Under Title 11
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
coan,
lewendon, gulliver and miltonberger, LLC
RICO
- Fraud Connected With A Case Under Title 11
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
Members of u.s. Congress
orin
hatch, u.s. Senator, Utah
RICO
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
john ashcroft,
former u.s.
Senator, Missouri
RICO
- Obstruction of Justice
[Title 18, Section 1962(d), Conspiring to Violate Provisions of Title 18, Section 1962];
NON-RICO
- Misprision of Felony
Sadly, though I believe direct knowledge of these (specific to this
case) crimes to be far more widespread on the part of other members of congress
(and “higher”), particularly joseph lieberman of Connecticut,
and boxer and feinstein of california,
the same would not properly be included in this affidavit, but see generally
and infra [I did not send documents to them owing to their complicity in and
support of the always corrupt/criminal clinton
administration and the obvious futility of same (reno,
etc.), and they were not mentioned in the CIA and FBI Agents’ Affidavits Under
Penalty of Perjury].
_______________________________________________________
FBI Contacts:
Documents/documentary evidence delivered by
fax, courier, and by hand, as well as in phone conferences to:
Louis J. Freeh,
(former) Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation
Ronald Barndollar,
FBI Agent, New Haven, Connecticut
Jeff Hayes, FBI Agent, (formerly? of) Long
Beach, California
Some of the Federal Laws Brazenly and Flagrantly Violated and Apposite in
This Case Are Immediately Appended Hereto to Facilitate Review Thereof [Click
to View]:
TITLE 18 USC, Sections
1961-1968 [RICO];
TITLE 18 USC, Section 4
[Misprision of Felony];
TITLE 18 USC, Section
371 [Conspiracy] ;
TITLE 18 USC, Section
201 [Bribery] ;
TITLE 18 USC, Chapter
73 [Obstruction of Justice] ;
Annexed Hereto As A Part Hereof And Incorporated Herein In It's Entirety By
Reference Thereto Is :
