Scott Huminski v. Lee amt sherif Mike Scott - korruption sag

"AEGIS Alliance opfordrer den amerikanske regering og andre til at undersøge denne sag. Sag nr. 17-MM- 000815 i Lees amtskontor for domstole.”

Dette er ifølge en klage indgivet af Scott Huminski mod lkso sherif Mike Scott af Lee amt florida på october 13. 2017. Her er en download af alle retslige dokumenter fremstillet ved AEGIS Alliance, fri for virus.

Scott Huminski er borger- journalist og aktivist who resides in Bonita Springs, Florida. The complaint says “See Generally, Huminski v. Corsones, 396 F.3d 53 (2d Cir. 2005)”. His writings criticize Sheriff Mike Scott, and Huminski had emailed his writings to prospective candidates for Sheriff who are LCSO employees and likely to run for office as is the custom for sheriff candidates in Florida (to be deputies prior to seeking office). The Sheriff silenced criticism of himself by requesting and obtaining a gag order concerning Huminski’s reportage to political opponents of the Sheriff. An abuse of power to wrongfully gain advantage in his political goals.

Sheriff Scott chose to silence Huminski’s criticism and to deny Huminski of all public safety services in retaliation for Huminski’s core protected political speech. Sheriff Scott applied for a court protective order which forbids “contact and communication” with the Sheriff and all employees of the LCSO. The Sheriff’s request for a protective order was granted by Judge Krier in April, 2017. See attached. Huminski can not report a crime to the only police agency with jurisdiction in Bonita Springs. This is evidenced in 911 tapes on 9/23 and 9/24 when Huminski was the victim of property crimes and assault. Withholding service is another technique of the Sheriff to retaliate against his critics for political gain.

Den beskyttende orden udformet af sheriffen er absolut og har nul undtagelser til sin feje effektivitet, lyddæmpning kritiker Huminski og nægte ham offentlig sikkerhed.

Huminski is a witness in matters pending before the Circuit and County courts in Fort Myers. The Sheriff’s protective order forbids Huminski’s participation in court matters as Huminski must contact and interact with security screeners that are LCSO employees and courthouse deputies stationed at the courtrooms. Sheriff Scott’s obtaining a protective order prohibiting Huminski’s participation as a witness constitutes criminal obstruction of justice, witness intimidation and witness tampering. Huminski is prohibited from attending hearings that he is a party to – also obstruction of justice. These crimes under State and Federal law are related to corrupt manipulation of the courts by the Sheriff to advance his political agenda and gain advantage in elections.

Det er typisk for uetisk adfærd, der normalt er forbundet med en politistat.

Sherif Scott blev forkyndt af den føderale domstol med en meddelelse om indledning af konkurs den eller omkring 4 / 30 / 2017, I Re: Scott Huminski, og hans status som "pro se" i sagen blev bemærket af den føderale domstol.

The conduct of Sheriff Scott constitutes criminal obstruction of justice, witness intimidation and tampering in violation of State and Federal criminal codes. Specifically, the order obtained by Sheriff Scott forbade service of the Sheriff in a matter pending before the U.S. Bankruptcy Court and specified by Bankruptcy Rule 9027. Sheriff Scott was listed as “pro se” in the bankruptcy proceedings. Under Rule 9027, Huminski was mandated to serve the Sheriff with federal removal papers. Because of the
Sheriff’s protective order, Huminski’s service of the Sheriff under federal court rules was criminally obstructed by the shield erected by the Sheriff set forth in his protective order. Sheriff Scott’s order makes him litigation-proof to further his political ambitions and at the same time excludes Huminski from the Lee County Courthouse regarding matters not related to the Sheriff and those related to the Sheriff.

Huminski and the 20th Circuit State’s Attorney stipulated to narrowly-tailor another order of Judge Krier that was not requested by Sheriff Scott although it did contain the same draconian terms as the Sheriff’s protective order and Chief County Judge Hon. James Adams signed that order. The identical order requested by Sheriff Scott still exists and is active per order of Sheriff Scott. See Attached.

Access to public safety for Huminski constitutes the crime of criminal contempt, a charge Huminski is facing at this time for merely reporting crime to the LCSO and Sheriff Scott. Being charged with a crime for simply reporting a crime to Sheriff Scott exemplifies the complete denial of public safety services engineered by the Sheriff.

The Sheriff’s desire to undermine federal Bankruptcy law with knowledge of a matter pending where he was listed as pro se constitutes clear intent to obstruct federal law and federal court proceedings. A State Sheriff can not endeavor to undermine laws and court rules enacted by the United States congress. This is not only abuse of power, in the context of Huminski’s Bankrupcty case, it is criminal. Huminski also filed 2 motions for orders to show cause against the Sheriff in bankruptcy court whereby service upon Sheriff Scott was obstructed by his protective orders.

Truslerne om anholdelse / retsforfølgning i sheriffens beskyttelsesordre hindrer og forhindrer Huminski i at deltage i sager, han har verseret i Circuit Court og County Court i Lee County. Denne indblanding, intimidering, manipulation og obstruktion fra sherif Scott er kriminel.

The abuse of the power of his office to make himself litigation-proof is an item of great pecuniary value. Leverage of his position to influence the courts to enter rulings of great monetary value to the Sheriff is an abuse of power. Denial of public safety services to Huminski in retaliation for criticism is similarly corrupt.

Så, ifølge e-mails sendt til advokat neymotin fra Scott Huminski:

Sendt: onsdag, december 20, 2017 11: 04
Hej Atty Neymotin,

Your office is responsible for handling this criminal appeal/petition. This is a criminal contempt case assigned to Z. Miller of your office. This appeal arises directly out of the criminal matter assigned to your office. I must also inform you that I am receiving ineffective assistance of counsel in the underlying criminal matter. The criminal case was pending in the Circuit Court for several months and then was “transferred” to County Court.

Please assign an attorney who knows the below law to my case and assign your appellate people to the appeal. See 2DCA docket below. The criminal case is frivolous and the order involved that I allegedly violated are patently unconstitutional and mandate surrender of constitutional rights — exceptions to the Collateral Bar Rule, that your office has ignored.

Der er ingen STATUTE, DOMSTOLE ELLER FL MYNDIGHED, der bestemmer, at der skal foretages en overførsel mellem CIRCUIT OG COUNTY DOMSTOLE. Dit kontors manglende evne til at anerkende dette grundliggende spørgsmål er at spilde tiden på alle og sammensætninger, der er baseret på retlige og retlige ressourcer.

Please recurse off denne sag, hvis du ikke har personale ekspertise til at håndtere spørgsmålene. Hr. Miller nægter at indgive beslutningsforslag på grundlag af ovenstående og andre spørgsmål. - scott huminski

Sendt: onsdag, december 20, 2017 11: 11 am
Hej Atty Neymotin,

Atty Miller løj for mig efter høringen. Han sagde, at dit kontor ville deltage i den verserende andragende i 2DCA, 2D17- 4740. At lyve underminerer forholdet mellem advokat og klient.

December 20, 2017 11: 20 AM
Hej Atty Neymotin,

Dit kontor har ikke arbejdet med forbrydelsen og nægter alt, jeg har bedt om til støtte for mit forsvar. Tildel en anden advokat eller træk din sag tilbage. Du er stadig ansvarlig for 2DCA-sagen.

Misbrug af en juridisk sag, der er betroet dit kontor, er en etisk overtrædelse. - scott huminski

Sendt: onsdag, december 20, 2017 12: 54
Hej Atty Neymotin,

Dit kontor har rådet mig til at overtræde dommer Kriers ordrer. Dommerens kendelse forhindrer kontakt med sheriffen eller hans personale. Som sådan er det kriminelt foragt for mig at interagere med dommere sikkerhed screensere og fogeder ved Lee Court.

Det er uetisk at opfordre mig til at overtræde Circuit-domstolens ordrer. Med det i tankerne, hvad er dit kontors råd til høringen i morgen om min tilstedeværelse?

Skal jeg ikke deltage og risikere en dommerkendelse eller deltage og risikere en foragt anklage? - Scott huminski

Sendt: onsdag, 20. december 2017 1: 54

Sheriffen forhindrede tjeneste i USA konkursret (en enhed af USA distriktsret), hindrede tjeneste i 2DCA 2D17- 4740, forhindrede min deltagelse i en høring i 17- CA- 421 og deltager i løbende obstruktion i 17- MM- 815.

The sheriff procured a protective order for him and his staff that prohibits contact or communication. WITHOUT EXCEPTION. As such I am banished from the Lee Court complex in violation of Huminski v. Corsones, 396 F.3d 53 (2nd Cir. 2005). This and other issued are exhaustively documented in the below papers filed in the 2DCA.

Hvor sagen og dens nøgletal foreligger

Sheriff Mike Scott, the central figure in Huminski’s complaint, led the Lee County Sheriff’s Office from 2004 and did not seek another term in 2018. He left office in January 2019 without ever being indicted on any of the obstruction or witness-tampering allegations raised in filings like this one. His undersheriff, Carmine Marceno, was appointed to succeed him in 2018, then won election in 2020 and re-election in 2024, keeping the office in the same line of leadership Huminski had criticized.

The prosecutorial side of the dispute also turned over. Stephen B. Russell, who served as State Attorney for Florida’s 20th Judicial Circuit covering Lee County, did not run again after 2018. Amira Fox, his successor and the first woman to hold the post, took office in January 2019 and has overseen the circuit’s prosecutions since. The protective-order and criminal-contempt matters Huminski documented played out in that 20th Circuit and the County Court in Fort Myers, where the Lee County Clerk of Courts continues to maintain the public record under the original case number for anyone seeking to review the filings firsthand.

The office did not get quieter after Scott left. On August 29, 2026, Sheriff Carmine Marceno was due in Tallahassee for a hearing on a second Florida Commission on Ethics investigation into him and the department he inherited. Huminski kept filing public-records requests into 2025, including a Sunshine Law demand over the statute used in 17-MM-000815. The AEGIS Alliance published two follow-ups: Yderligere oplysninger og fortsat domstolsprøvelseMere af dette beat lever i Politiansvar.