UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA (Federal)
Case # 2:22-CV-00766-JAD-BNW
(Originally filed in Error with NV District (State) Court under - CASE NO. A-22-852111-W)
WRIT OF MANDAMUS; PETITION TO UNSEAL RECORDS
FOR FOIA FBI FILE REQUEST NUMBER 1334338-000
Petitioner Tiwanda Lovelace brings this action against the U.S. Department of Justice and FBI to compel compliance with the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 (“FOIA”), Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552a (“Privacy Act”) and (Conspiracy Against Rights) 18, U.S.C., Section 241 and (Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law) 18, U.S.C., Section 242. As grounds therefore, Petitioners allege as follows:
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1. The Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B) and
28 U.S.C. § 1331.
2. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e).
PARTIES
3. Petitioner Tiwanda Lovelace is a law-abiding private citizen residing in Las
Vegas, NV. who is also the daughter of Robert Heard (MDOC 112084), a man who was
convicted of killing a MI police officer, Stanley Rapaski and Bar owner, Cass Czerwinski.
4. Petitioner Lovelace is an online publisher who seeks to promote transparency,
integrity, and accountability in government and fidelity to the rule of law. As part of its mission, Petitioner requests records from federal agencies pursuant to FOIA. Petitioner analyzes the responses and disseminates its findings and the requested records to herself and the American public to inform them about “what their government is up to.” Petitioner Lovelace sought access to confirm and address concerns of unwarranted violation of privacy, unprovoked investigations, or any reason why l would be experiencing unexplained mail tampering, delays in telephone
connections, electronic and computer disturbances. Petitioner Lovelace is also trying to access reasons why the laws are never upheld when both, state and federal crimes are committed against the Petitioner and/or why my complaints or allegations combined with supporting legal documents, are dismissed, and ignored.
5. Respondent U.S. Department of Justice and FBI is an agency of the United States
government and is headquartered at 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20530. Respondent has possession, custody, and control of records to which Petitioner seeks access.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
6. On August 22, 2016, Petitioners jointly submitted a request to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”), a component of Respondent (DOJ). Petitioner Tiwanda
Lovelace submitted the request under FOIA, and Petitioner Lovelace submitted the request under both FOIA and the Privacy Act on May 20, 2015.
7. Petitioner Lovelace sought access to any and all records concerning, regarding, or relating to herself. Such records include, but are not limited to, records of background checks of Tiwanda Lovelace, records of communications, contacts, or correspondence between Tiwanda Lovelace and employees, officials, or agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and records of investigations concerning or regarding Tiwanda Lovelace as a victim.
8. On August 22, 2016, the letter from the US DOJ – FBI advised that under FOIPA, Title 5 U.S. Code. Section 552/552a there were (redactions) deletions made pursuant to
5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6), 5 U.S.C. § (b)(7)(C), 5 U.S.C. § (b)(7)(D), 5 U.S.C. § (b)(7)(E) and 5
U.S.C. § 552a (j)(2). Upon receiving this request, the FBI sought to have the requested file request (FBI: 1334338-000), Sealed by Court Order on the basis of exemptions: 5 U.S.C. §552(b)(6) - Personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy; 5 U.S.C. § 552 (b)(7)(c) - could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, and 5 U.S.C. § 552 (b)(7)(D) – could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of confidential source, including a State, local or foreign agency or authority or any private institution which furnished information om a confidential basis, and, in the case of record or information compiled by a criminal law enforcement authority in the course of a criminal investigation or by an agency
conducting a lawful national security intelligence investigation, information furnished by a confidential source; and 5 U.S.C. § 552 (b)(7)(E) - would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions or would disclose guidelines for law; and 5 U.S.C. § 552a (j)(2) – material reporting investigative efforts pertaining to the enforcement of criminal law including efforts to prevent, control, or reduce crime or apprehend criminals. These exemptions indicate either an active investigation or undercover officer and/or informant, which means that this FBI file would span 35+ years ago for an individual without any federal arrest or
cases.
9. Petitioner has attached documents which clearly reflect federal crimes being
committed against her continually for a consistent thirty years; yet, there was no effort made to prevent, control, or reduce crime or apprehend criminals. Petitioner has attached documents which clearly demonstrate deprivation of privacy rights when mail tampering and delays are intercepted spanning thirty years, across multiple carriers. See Exhibits.
10. Petitioner Lovelace was subjected to abuse of power, intimidation, sexual assault, mail tampering, illegal modifications and entries to her criminal background and other federal crimes that went unaddressed during the dates covered under the FBI file. With regards to exemption and 5 U.S.C. § 552 (b)(7)(D) – could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of confidential source…Petitioner was never an informant. Petitioner contacted respondents and many governmental agencies for assistance with bullying from major entities but was denied at every turn. Petitioner asserts that her correspondences were most likely used in the respondent’s alleged investigation. Petition is convinced that the respondents were able to achieve their intended goal or target because Petitioner was met with extreme bullying and referred to as a ‘Snitch’ or ‘Informant.’ Petitioner was exposed to violence, intimidation, threats and worse. Petitioner was never directly contacted by any officials regarding multiple state and federal crimes. Petitioner was left uninformed and unprotected. This FBI file indicates the timeframe for these events were covered in the FOIA FBI File that the respondents has had Sealed by Court Order. See Exhibits for intimidations and threats. The Respondents ‘alleged’ investigation results were made public because the petitioner was subjected to bullying by those associated with their intended target. Basically, Petitioner alleges that the Respondents use petitioner’s pleas for assistance in their own investigation, while refusing to acknowledge any and all criminal activity targeted towards petitioner. In fact, it is likely that petitioner was used as bait due to absolutely no direct communication. If Respondent claim ‘purposes for protection…,’ petitioner would have had direct communication with any law enforcement agencies that addressed unlawful,
criminal acts that petitioner was subjected to.
11. Plaintiff Lovelace has repeatedly contacted the DOJ, FBI AND AG Offices
regarding privacy violation concerns, mail-tampering and intimidation dating back to onset and up to 2022. If Respondent is claiming exemption 5 U.S.C. § 552a (j)(2) – material reporting investigative efforts pertaining to the enforcement of criminal law including efforts to prevent, control, or reduce crime or apprehend criminals… Yet, Petitioner has had no arrest, nor any state or federal criminal in over thirty years to justify a 357-page FBI file. Meanwhile, multiple federal and state crimes have been committed against the petitioner.
12. On March 11, 2003, Petitioner Lovelace filed civil action (1: 03-MI-0053 and 1:
03-CV-0925) in the U.S. District Court, against Def. Dekalb Central Probation and the Dekalb County Police Dept. under 28 USC, 42 U.S.C. §1983, 28 U.S.C. § 2201 and 42 U.S.C. 1983 and 1988, 28 U.S.C. § 2680 (a) and (h), alleging violations of the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the 14th Amendment; asserting a general “deprivation of rights.” (Docket Item #2 Section I - page(s) 1, 2 and Section II - page 2). I video recorded submitting original filings, but courts clerks modified plaintiff’s filing to remove reference to supporting documents. Plaintiff had to submit repeated requests to court for clerks to correct filings that clerks edited to remove police as defendants, etc... The Petition for Judicial review was dismissed referencing no supporting documentation. It is a federal crime for clerks to modify filings for the benefit of police as defendants. The FBI were made aware, but Petitioner was never addressed with regards to any documents in support of allegations. Petitioner’s pleas for assistance with federal crimes being committed against her was deliberately dismissed and ignored, depriving petitioner of rights.
13. Petitioner Lovelace repeatedly contacted officials regarding the maintenance of
inaccurate and illegal entries were being maintained on the CJIS/GCIC criminal background records. As of the date of this petition, these inaccurate and misleading transmittals remain and have not been completely corrected. Petitioner Lovelace alleged that Dekalb County Police, acting under color of state law, caused various constitutional harms, and engaged in “willful misconduct… conscious indifference” by permitted misleading entries to remain and by failing to train and supervise its employees in the entry and maintenance of criminal history information in CJIS and GCIC. According to O.C.G.A. 17-10—(f), ‘Any order modifying a sentence which
is entered without notice and an opportunity for a hearing as provided shall be void.’ In Morrisey b. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, 484 (1972) – ‘to the probationer, who is integrating himself (or herself) into a community, it is fundamentally unfair to be promised freedom for turning square corners with the State but to have the State retract that promise when nothing he or she has done legitimately warrants such an about face.’ Similarly, it is irrational for the State to conclude, in the absence of valid cause tracing to the probationer’s conduct, that warrants changing First Offender’s Act to Conviction. Thus, while the state can define the rules of punishment initially, choosing probation or imprisonment, the State cannot change the rules in the middle of the game. See Wood v. Georgia, 450 U.S. 261, 286-287 (1981) – A probation violation must therefore be such as to make it logical for the State to conclude that its initial decision to choose probation under the First Offender’s Act should now be abandoned. Refer to Attachment, ‘Plaintiff had no prior criminal record; that is, other than a dismissed domestic. In Wisconsin v. Constantineau, 400 U.S. 433 (1971), it invalidates a statutory scheme by which a person, without any opportunity for a hearing and rebuttal, could be labeled and barred from justice; the court noted
that governmental action was stigmatizing the individual’s reputation, honor and integrity; as in this case.
14. Petitioner has endured abuse of power under color of law by the deliberate
neglect of officials (up to and including the respondents). Prior to receiving the First Offender Act, Petitioner booked a flight from MI to turn herself into Dekalb County authorities on June 27, 1992. Instead of listing my voluntary surrender as a ‘Surrender,’ officials illegally added (2) two more charges. Petitioner has provided a copy of the court transcript which confirms that Lovelace flew to Georgia to address the charges from 1988. Petitioner has attached copies of instances where ‘blatant egregious abuses of power, under color of law’ is easily identified. See attached Exhibits. Respondents ignored repeated pleas for assistance in upholding federal laws regarding the deliberate illegal modifications to criminal record, modifications of request and documents. Respondents allowed and facilitated a conspiracy by officers to intimidate and retaliate for lawsuit against police and for other apparent reasons. Respondents facilitated and enabled those in association with their intended target to bully and intimidate.
15. As recent as 2020, Lovelace was subject to a criminal background for housing
which returned an alert of felony charges, without referencing the date of 30+ years ago and that it should have been listed under the First Offender Act. Alerting the apartment complex of felonious charges without specifying actual dates would generate a negative reaction and/or denial. Petitioner is consistently denied assistance with abuses of power under color of law; therefore, she feels corralled into homelessness with very little options when anyone can violate rights without fear of consequences or reprisal. Most companies do not offer opportunity to dispute criminal background checks. Petitioner was and continues to be harmed by willful
neglect and continues to be deprived of her right to FOA First Offender Act.
16. Respondent was notified that officials, without case or notice of hearing,
illegally modified petitioner Lovelace’s criminal background to change her First Offender Act to an actual felony conviction. Then on December 7, 2005, Dekalb County officials notified the US Dept. of Housing and Urban Development that there was an active warrant. See Exhibit. Although I was living in Dekalb after this illegally obtained warrant and they could have arrested me; yet, they opted to only take my housing…forcing me and my children into homelessness, repeatedly over the course of thirty years. This action combined with the modification of criminal background entry of a Felony Sentence for Shopping Cart Offense for Petitioner demonstrate ‘a combined effort’ deliberate and willful intent with full knowledge petitioner was
under supervision in MI. Petitioner has NEVER had any arrest for any Shopping Cart cases and this entry into the criminal record data base reflected this inaccurate and false charges demonstrate true intent to harm.
17. Petitioner admonishes that the warrant was used by officials in defense to allow
officials to change FOA Sentence (without adjudication of guilt) to a Felony Sentence. It stayed active on petitioner’s criminal background as a felony conviction for over 20 years, preventing housing and hindering employment opportunities.
18. Petitioner has provided a copy of this referenced warrant, wherein, Dekalb
officials state that Lovelace had absconded from supervision. However, petitioner has provided documentation from reporting agency that contradicts their alleged findings. Every time petitioner attempts to exercise her rights, she is faced with more abuse of power and absolutely no communication from those contacted to address deprivations.
19. Petitioner met with her Rep. Catherine Cortez- Masto office rep. Manuel Davilla
and provided documents in support of abuse of power under color of law and advised her staff member of intimidation and forced homelessness. I was advised that they would forward the materials and that they would see about securing my housing again. I never heard from them again, forcing me into more homelessness and deprivations.
20. Petitioner has recently (2022) filed an official complaint with the Ethics
committee. She has now lost her employment upon return of medical leave.
21. Petitioner has travelled the United States, seeking to exercise her rights to Life,
Liberty and Justice, only to be corralled into homelessness as punishment for fighting for her rights. Petitioner Lovelace has never had any drug addictions or criminal cases after her FOA (1988-1993) but she was forced to seek shelter accommodations in multiple cities across the U.S. Petitioner had employment rescinded due to the maintenance and illegally modified criminal background. For example, Lovelace has never been arrested for a shopping cart case but it is on my arrest record. Petitioner has attached copies of instances where ‘blatant egregious abuses of power, under color of law’ is easily identified. See attached Exhibits.
22. Petitioner walked into the Las Vegas FBI Field office with her documentation in
support of allegations of abuse of power, privacy violation and intimidation. In addition, petitioner Lovelace received a letter that was allegedly from the DOJ (see attached). This letter was sent first class mail from DOJ stating no interest in investigating the matter was unsigned, with incorrect zip code and was sent allegedly from D.C. was received in less than two days. It is impossible for a letter with the incorrect zip code to go from DC to NV in two days. Petitioner has attached copies of instances where ‘blatant egregious abuses of power, under color of law’ is
easily identified. See attached Exhibits.
23. Petitioner had a major music co-publishing contract, secured copyrights with
names of musical works that were on the top of music charts; yet Lovelace was refused any and all legal representation across multiple states. The only entities that can address crimes across multiple states is the DOJ/FBI; yet, when contacted…their response was to obtain a court ordered seal.
24. Petitioner began her online publishing to shed light on the atrocities that she has
faced but has been met with unfair trade practices and unfair competition for over a decade. Respondents referred to exemption 5 U.S.C. § 552a (j)(2) – material reporting investigative efforts pertaining to the enforcement of criminal law including efforts to prevent, control, or reduce crime or apprehend criminals…however, supporting document show blatant unfair competition, unfair practice and intimidation. Petitioner was told by random individuals that her sharing her experience through her publications would not make a profit. Through the combined efforts of third-party seller on multiple platforms, petitioner was forced to compete with her own
publications ranking last. See exhibits where sellers had her publication for sale for $33,418.88 and another seller listed eBook for $0.78. Petitioner alleges these instances were retaliation and intimidation tactics used to induce hopelessness and ‘harm.’ Respondents were made aware of continued violations of law; yet, petitioner consistent received correspondences which denied any assistance. These exhibits confirm public knowledge of an allowed conspiracy to harm because clearly shows multiple sellers entertaining prices meant to induce harm. Petitioner has
no public social media following and has no celebrity status; yet, public records show constant mockery of business ventures that are related to exposing abuses of power and corruption.
25. While trying to establish her publishing business, Petitioner received a delivery
or receipt confirmation as if someone had placed an order on her eBook website but the actual items: ‘a sledgehammer and a wire cutter’ were listed as a bookstore purchase. Petitioner alleges this was intimidation and a threat. Petitioner has continued receiving threats and bullying that is meant to stop my attempts to seek assistance.
26. Petitioner Lovelace is not from the ‘streets’ and has no other options but to
continue to seek resolution through the courts. Petitioner Lovelace believe that her privacy has been violated to deter others from assisting with abuses of power, under color of law. The courts would have to agree that in order for anything to be blocked, there would have to be access and knowledge prior to events in order to intercept. Prior knowledge would explain mail tampering and email service delivery issues when seeking assistance. Petitioner has submitted a substantial number of convenient coincidences that when given access to the FBI file…this would provide clarification as to their knowledge and/or involvement. Likewise, by violating petitioners’ privacy these same officials behind abuses would be alerted when Petitioner would contact
others in position to assist. This would explain why Petitioner has never been able to obtain resolution. Petitioner can present evidence that her privacy is being violated for unlawful purposes. Petitioner alleges that Respondents would be in a position to counter any attempts to expose official abuses of power. bPetitioner is the daughter of a man convicted of killing a police office and yet, no officials find it odd that a US citizen would have a 357- page FBI file and consistent complaints filed with multiple governmental agencies that have gone unaddressed for decades?
27. There are too many federal crimes being committed across multiple state lines
blatantly for me not to have any communication with officials. Petitioner Lovelace has never a drug abuse history has no federal, felony or misdemeanor convictions that would merit a 357-page file; therefore, respondents should be ordered to release an unredacted FOIA FBI file AND be investigated for federal crimes that went unaddressed for decades.
28. Petitioner is an average citizen who was able to compile using public records the
list of documents below. If petitioner was able to compile this information without resources or assistance surely the FBI is fully aware and have opted to not uphold the laws and communicate directly with petitioner at some point in these 30 years of all of these federal crimes being committed. Respondents claim exemption 5 U.S.C. § 552a (j)(2) – material reporting investigative efforts pertaining to the enforcement of criminal law including efforts to prevent, control, or reduce crime or apprehend criminals; yet, they refuse to review and address documents in support of allegations against violations of a conspiracy against rights for decades.
29. Petitioner has clearly shown that respondents has shown a deliberate, willful
indifference and willful neglect to uphold the laws for three decades. Petitioner has been humiliated degraded and deprived of all her human and civil rights in these matters.’ Petitioner begs the court to consider this information and assist an upholding the laws by providing her access to the information which they choose to not disclose. The public has a right to know that those in positions of power are not using that power for selfish or personal gains.
30. Throughout these three decades anybody that even attempts to assist is
discouraged illegally and through intimidation or bribery. 5 U.S.C. § 552a (j)(2) – material reporting investigative efforts pertaining to the enforcement of criminal law including efforts to prevent, control, or reduce crime or apprehend criminals.
31. Their investigative practices would appear to involve using citizens without
consideration, consent or knowledge to pursue their intended target(s). Their investigative practices would appear to involve using citizens request for assistance, complaints and allegations for their own purposes, without communication for decades. Petitioner has provided substantial documentation to establish petitioner has been targeted.
32. When petitioner seeks assistance, she is met with more bullying and pressure to
stop. when petitioner trying to maintain shelter and employment, she is met with external pressure to fight for rights or referred to as a pet or slave, and complacently accepting deprivations. Due to privacy violations and public knowledge, Petitioner has been pulled between the Respondents (who represents the system) and the part of the public that has been subjected to similar abuses…forcing petitioner to be subjected, repeatedly. The exhibits that involve the public’s participation in intimidation stems from their believing a ‘narrative’ provided to them by the system, while Respondents conceal the file from petitioner. It is public knowledge that the public is trained to frown on ‘informants’ or ‘Snitches’. What better way to
evade accountability and be entertained by abuses of power? Fighting for rights does not make an individual an informant!
33. As an African American female US citizen who can legally say that she has no
misdemeanors or felony convictions (state or federal), Petitioner is supposed to be able to exercise her civil and human rights to life, liberty, etc... I shouldn't have a 357-page FBI file.
COUNT 1 (Violation of FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552)
34. Petitioner reallege paragraphs 1 through 33 as if fully stated herein.
35. Respondent is unlawfully withholding records requested by Petitioners and this
FBI file was not sealed by court order until after Petitioner Lovelace requested a copy.
36. Respondent is unlawfully withholding and have redacted records requested by
Petitioners pursuant FOIA and has had them Sealed by Court Order to hide.
37. Petitioners are being irreparably harmed by reason of Respondent’s
unlawful withholding of requested records by redacting, and Petitioners will continue to be irreparably harmed unless Respondent is compelled to conform its conduct to the requirements of the law.
38. Petitioner Lovelace is well aware that all officials are not untrustworthy;
however, in 30+ years of contacting representatives and our governmental agencies…I have been unable to locate anyone who would at a minimum review the documents in support of the many allegations. Petitioner is convinced that everywhere she seeks
assistance, there is intimidation and more abuse of power under color of law. Hopefully, this court will allow for the review of the file in question because petitioner has provided sufficient documentation to demonstrate that respondent is not being forthright in it’s decision to withhold the file that covers decades of abuse, through redaction.
COUNT 2 (Violation of Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552a)
39. Petitioner Lovelace paragraphs 1 through 38 as if fully stated herein.
40. Respondent is unreasonably refusing to comply with Petitioner Lovelace’s
request under the Privacy Act.
41. Petitioner Lovelace is being irreparably harmed by reason of Respondent’s
unlawful withholding of requested records, and Petitioner Lovelace will continue to be irreparably harmed unless Respondent is compelled to conform its conduct to the
requirements of the law.
42. Respondent placed Petitioner Lovelace in extreme danger without her
knowledge or consent and now has petitioned the court to Seal their illegal actions.
Respondents engaged in willful deliberate neglect to uphold the laws on behalf of Petitioner.
43. Petitioner Lovelace has never worked with law enforcement on any level other
than to seek assistance with addressing the 30+ years of bullying wherein she has been forced into homelessness and denied employment due to illegal modification and maintenance of inaccurate and misleading transmittals designed to degrade and deprive rights to the daughter of a man convicted of killing a police officer.
44. Petitioner is not completely convinced if the initial cause for deliberate
deprivation of rights is immediately connected to her brief stint within the music industry or her father’s conviction history or all of the above; however, Lovelace can produce a multitude of documents in support of allegations (at a minimum) which demonstrate questionable behavior…surely, the DOJ/FBI has the resources and all can assume that the Respondents are aware of each of these allegations. Lovelace has never been directly addressed regarding copyright infringements, publishing and music royalties, blatant civil and human rights allegations or anything. I submitted a complaint of civil rights to the Dept of Civil rights against the FBI; yet, they referred me back to the FBI.
45. During this copyright infringements, Lovelace was working with her copublishing company, and they sent her a letter addressing her allegations of copyright
infringements with the mail stamped or postmarked with the words, “comics” on a serious matter involving millions of dollars in music royalties on a top can recording. The USPS or post office is under Federal jurisdiction, Respondents were made aware, yet, Petitioner never received no direct communication at any point while suffering from these violations of federal crimes of intimidation.
46. Petitioner has never experienced any alcohol or drug abuse or mental health
concerns or issues. Petitioner stayed out of trouble with the law after being given the FOA First Offender Act but was essentially deprived of all rights, publicly and under color of law.
47. Petitioner Lovelace has a right to life, liberty and justice but has been denied
any and all recourse covering three industries over 30+ years of deprivation of rights, under color of law. By requesting that the FOIA FBI file, Lovelace would definitely be able to clear her name and to denounce any claims that she worked with the FBI as an Informant. Lovelace has been subject to persecution from whoever it was that they were investigating at the start. Lovelace contends that she (through her work) may have been involuntarily used by officials, without her knowledge than she was discarded. Lovelace has been bullied for decades, while all officials disregard her request for assistance in all matters (under color of law) and ignore bullying from officials across multiple states.
Count 3 (Violation of Conspiracy Against Rights 18, U.S.C., Section 241)
48. Petitioner Lovelace paragraphs 1 through 47 as if fully stated herein.
49. Respondent place Petitioner Lovelace in extreme danger without her
knowledge or consent and now has petitioned the court to seal their illegal actions.
Respondents engaged in willful deliberate neglect to uphold the laws on behalf of Petitioner.
50. This statute makes it unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure,
oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person of any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the United States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same).
51. The statute further makes it unlawful for two or more persons to go in
disguise…’ with the intent to prevent or hinder his/her free exercise or enjoyment of any rights so secured.
52. Petitioner Lovelace is being irreparably harmed by reason of Respondent’s
unlawful withholding of requested records, and Petitioner Lovelace will continue to be irreparably harmed unless Respondent is compelled to conform its conduct to the
requirements of the law.
53. Petitioner has documentation that confirms mail, emails and other
correspondences regarding numerous complaints against official’s misconduct have beenblocked, hindered and tampered with. See Exhibits.
54. Petitioner Lovelace has provided copies of printouts which clearly demonstrate
the officials have deliberately sought to harm by illegally maintaining false arrest entries and modifying my criminal background. In one instance, officials placed an image of an unknown African American Male with her name underneath. Clearly, Lovelace is not a male. Petitioner has been presented as aggressive in pursuing resolution which has lead to harmful accusations that she is masculine or as an insult. These events were used to belittle, demean and to induce duress and harass petitioner. See attachment.
Count 4 (Violation of Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law 18, U.S.C., Section 242)
55. Petitioner Lovelace paragraphs 1 through 54 as if fully stated herein.
56. By depriving Petitioner the ability to benefit from First Offender Act that the
Court had Ruled, Petitioner was deprived of hat right to “…honestly state that Petitioner was adjudicated without guilt and has no felony convictions for well over (30) years. Instead, Petitioner suffered continued loss of employment and housing opportunities. Petitioner Lovelace has a right to life, liberty and justice but has been denied any and all recourse covering three industries over 30+ years of deprivation of rights, under color of law.
57. Petitioner Lovelace is being irreparably harmed by reason of Respondent’s
unlawful withholding of requested records, and Petitioner Lovelace will continue to be irreparably harmed unless Respondent is compelled to conform its conduct to the
requirements of the law.
WHEREFORE, Petitioners respectfully request that the Court: (1) unseal FOIPA
Request: 1334338-000 and order Respondent to conduct a search for any and all records responsive to Petitioners’ request and demonstrate that it employed search methods reasonably likely to lead to the discovery of records responsive to Petitioners’ request; (2) order Respondent to produce unredacted and unsealed, by a date certain, any and all non-exempt records responsive to Petitioners’ request and a Vaughn index of any responsive records withheld under claim of exemption; (3) enjoin Respondent from continuing to withhold any and all non-exempt records responsive to Petitioners’ request; (4) grant Petitioners an award of attorneys’ fees and other litigation costs reasonably incurred in this action pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(E) and 5 U.S.C. § 552a(g)(3)(B); and (5) grant Petitioner a hearing to ensure the Courts has received complete filings and (6) grant Petitioners such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.
Dated: May 5, 2022 Respectfully submitted,
Tiwanda Lovelace
Petitioner
EXHIBITS FOR PETITION TO UNSEAL RECORDS FOR FOIA FBI FILE REQUEST NUMBER 1334338-000 (97 Pages); and EXHIBITS FOR PETITION TO UNSEAL RECORDS (16 Pages)
EXHIBIT 1: First offender act discharge letter and envelope dated January 22, 2009, for first offender act case number 89cr2414 left by taking Adjudicated Without Guilt. It took 20 years before I can get this letter exonerating me and acknowledging that I should have had the first offender act for that whole 20 years. Officials deprived me of that right to claim my first offender act by illegally modifying my criminal background record and switching my first offender act to conviction without notice of hearing or provocation.
EXHIBIT 2: Conditions of Probation dated August 1992 confirms that the Georgia probation office was well aware that I was no longer under their supervision after I was accepted by Michigan and had no right to submit a request for warrant for absconding.
EXHIBIT 3: A page from the court transcript from the first offender act which confirms that Lovelace flew to Georgia from Michigan to turn herself in on June 27th. Upon surrender the sheriff's office in Decatur, instead of entering a surrender they opted to add two new charges. The charges were dismissed but the arrest stayed on my record for misleading purposes. The two additional charges made a combined total of five arrest entries for one incident and a single agency case number 13647.
EXHIBIT 4: A copy of an online Internet search for criminal history on March 8, 2014, for Tiwanda Lovelace revealed her name listed with an African American man's face with Petitioner Lovelace data mixed with incorrect charges. This is a sample of the information that is provided as criminal background history for employment and for housing.
EXHIBIT 5: A copy of employment offers and positions that were taken away due to their criminal background history entries and those misleading transmittals.
EXHIBIT 6: Internet State case report confirming petitioner was reporting as directed.
EXHIBIT 7: A copy of warrant dated May 18, 1993, from the DeKalb County alleging petitioner had absconded and refused to report and pay court ordered monies as instructed. Although petitioner was reporting as directed, they took it upon themselves to go in and issue a warrant for petitioner arrest. Per conditions of probation and interstate case reporting paperwork, they were aware and still got that warrant they then took the warrant and used it to take housing see exhibit. Just prior to them getting that warrant petitioner was living in Georgia at the time and they could have executed that warrant at any time, but they chose to wait until she had housing in Nevada.
EXHIBIT 8: A copy of a letter from department of housing and Urban development which says that the police and DeKalb County contacted housing to let them know that there was a warrant, and that they allege were unable to extradite. officers then proceeded to take her Section 8 housing, leaving petitioner and her children, homeless. Petitioner unable to secure and maintain employment due to their illegal background modification, entries, and misleading transmittals.
EXHIBIT 9: Recent email from Dept of Civil rights against the FBI; yet they referred me back to the FBI.
EXHIBIT 10: List (2) two examples of employment loss specifically due to deliberate maintenance of inaccurate and misleading entries.
EXHIBIT 11: A copy of contracts that were filed during the time frame covered under the FBI file and the time frame when petitioner alleged major copyright infringements. All the petitioner possessed a major co-publishing contract and copyrights of her own for her works and the list of songs on the radio on the top of the charts she was unable to locate and obtain and secure a lawyer for representation for over a decade.
EXHIBIT 12: Petitioner then filed lawsuits regarding her musical works and was met with blatant judicial misconduct we're in her complaints were referred to by the judge as a product of her female surgery. The courts in Michigan completely ignored copyrights actual violence that were happening to partitioner and her family. This was definitely a time frame when the FBI file was covered.
EXHIBIT 13: Unable to find Justice through the courts the petitioner decided to get into online publishing to share her experiences through books and other products. Petitioner was told she would never make a dime for exposing what happened to her and due to the unfair practices,’ petitioner has attached several documents from her online business which clearly shows some questionable actions that could clearly be condemned as intimidation, unfair competition and unfair practices.
EXHIBIT 14: There was a flood of sellers on the first page of the exhibit even after opting out of third-party Sellers and over 2 years they reported no sales but were actually selling her products as used and new.
EXHIBIT 15: This exhibit shows one seller that was her competition was selling petitioner’s own autobiography for $33,418.88 while some sellers had it for $0.78. This was during the time frame that the FBI file and that petitioner was seeking assistance from other governmental agencies to uphold her rights as a business owner, entrepreneur and a US citizen.
EXHIBIT 16: A copy of a contacts and attempted contacts of people in positions of power that refused to even acknowledge these blatant atrocities and examples of abuse of power.
EXHIBIT 17: The next exhibit shows mail delivery errors when reaching for assistance in attempting to contact those in positions to assist a copy of mail tampering a letter from three different mail carriers that Express unexplained delays when attempting to seek Justice. Lovelace was forced to go to different cities to seek assistance and would sometimes become stranded in those cities and subjected to more atrocities Force into homelessness due to her inability to maintain employment due to the background and housing.
EXHIBIT 18: Letter from DHL dated May 14, 1996 a letter from USPS tracking complaints of judicial misconduct delayed every agency contacted refuse to acknowledge blatant proof
EXHIBIT 19: While trying to establish her publishing business I have a copy of instances where Petitioner was triple charged unnecessarily to cause the rest and from that same company the online provider, I received a delivery or receipt confirmation as if someone had placed an order on my eBook website for my products but the actual items: a sledgehammer and a wire cutter were listed as a bookstore purchase, while I was receiving threats and bullying that was meant to stop my attempts to seek assistance.
EXHIBIT 20: During this copyright infringements Lovelace was working with her co-publishing company and they sent her a letter addressing her allegations of copyright infringements with the mail stamped or postmarked with the words, “comics” on a serious matter involving millions of dollars in music royalties on a top can recording. If I'm not mistaken the post office is under Federal jurisdiction, they were there at that time per the FBI file that I have so whoever was on this case was very well aware of what I was going through, and I never got no direct communication at any point while suffering from these violations.
EXHIBIT 21: Exhibit one a response letter from the department of Justice with the wrong ZIP code supposedly mailed from DC to Nevada stating that we have your materials, and we are not going to investigate my allegations initialed by AM. I questioned the validity of that letter because of the ZIP code however it still came from the doj who I reached out to and it reference that I reached out to them but still no word. By editing my transmissions and blocking my business ventures, I've been corralled into homelessness while my Representatives and Officials will not offer the protection of the Constitution and uphold my rights in any legal matter which ultimately makes me a ‘slave or the pet’ that I've been referenced to ask for the last 30 plus years.
EXHIBIT 22: List copies of the letters sent to the DOJ, Representatives, and governmental agencies… throughout the years.
EXHIBIT 23: Multiple Newspaper clippings to confirm father convicted of killing a police officer listing victims names. See exhibits - Exhibits for Petition to Unseal, Pages 63 to 75.
EXHIBIT 24: Letter from the US Department of Justice Office of Inspector General dated June 9, 2015, in response to my request for assistance with the allegations listed in this Petition. The documents in support of my allegations were referenced as correspondence when it was a request for assistance and notifying the DOJ of deprivation of rights at the hand of officials. The DOJ’s response was, “The matters that you raise are outside of our investigative jurisdiction, therefore no action will be taken by this office.” The letter was sent USPS First Class Mail alleging from Office of Inspector General; yet, it has no signature or title when other DOJ correspondences are legitimately signed. Lovelace has never had an opportunity to have these documents in support of allegations acknowledged or reviewed. Access to Lovelace’s 350-page FBI File, should clarify which correspondences are legitimate and why disregard discrepancies in DOJ’s responses.
EXHIBIT 25: Letter received from the US Department of Justice dated June 1, 2015, demonstrating the difference in signature and titles between other correspondences received from the US Department of Justice over the last 30 years.
EXHIBIT 26: a) Letter received from the Michigan Attorney General dated June 10, 2015, indicating that his jurisdiction is at state level and gave referrals. Although this is a professional response, there are no Lawyer service or pro bono attorneys who will even attempt to bring litigation against the police or federal agents. These allegations span multiple states, indicating federal crimes which make these allegations – federal. The ultimate response to my request for the FBI file was for them to have Lovelace’s 350-page FBI file Sealed by Court Order AND ‘...there will be no action taken!’ b) An additional correspondence received from the New York Attorney General dated June 25, 2015, indicating that his jurisdiction is at state level. Lovelace has consistently received this response throughout the last 30 years.
EXHIBIT 27: a) A copy of the receipt for the Official Complaint dated February 19, 2022, sent Office of Congressional Ethics U.S. House of Representatives regarding Rep. Catherine Cortez-Masto's willful neglect and deliberate inaction after her Manuel Davilla advised will forward to correct parties to pursue and restore housing; yet they never followed up. This email clearly stated facts and provided documentation in support of allegations of deprivation and worse. b) Also attached is the email confirmation of receipt of Ethics Complaint; yet, after (4) four months there has still been absolutely no communication and no further response is causing me to question if my Office of Ethics email response is legitimate or just another attempt to dissuade and induce harm.
EXHIBIT 28: Letter and envelop received from the US Department of Justice dated September 16, 2015, wherein their response stated, “In your complaint, you reported that for years you have made attempts through DOJ/FBI. You also claimed you walked into the Las Vegas Field Office to report major criminal activity, judicial misconduct and criminal acts to include rape and murder but the Las Vegas Office “shrugged it off.” The purpose of this letter is to advise you this matter does not warrant the opening of an administrative inquiry. IPU will take no further action in this matter.” Signed “AM” - Initial Processing Unit. The signature clearly depicts the same issues and shows the difference in signature and titles not reflecting and the difference between other correspondences received from the US Department of Justice over the last 30 years. This refusal is not only hurtful and disrespectful but also willful and deliberate neglect to uphold the law. Their refusal to acknowledge Lovelace as a citizen and their withholding direct communication to review the provided supporting documentation for accuracy raises questions as to their ability to uphold the law on behalf of the daughter of a man who is serving a life sentence for allegedly killing a police officer. Releasing the FBI file will determine intent to deliberate harm or neglect of duty.
SEE BELOW TO REVIEW EXHIBITS: