IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF KANSAS

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

(FICTITIOUS PARTY) )
plaintiff, ) Case Nos. 10-3202
V. ) 10-3203
) 10-3204
CARRIE M. NEIGHBORS ) D.C. NOs. 2:07-cr-20124
(Beneficiary) ) 2:08-cr-20105-CM-JPO-1
Defendant 1 ) 2:07 -cr-20073-CM-1
)Trust # 983160-340348-080047
GUY M. NEIGHBORS )Issue Date E8:Y3160:A48:S4:M3:D1
(Beneficiary) )Trust # 983158-310405-020026
Defendant 2 )Issue Date E8:Y3158:A5:SI:M4:D3
1/1512011

JUDICIAL NOTICE BY WAY OF AFFIDAVIT OF FORMAL COMPLAINT,

IT WOULD APPEAR MY ATIORNEY MR. PINCUS IS ENGAGED IN PROSECTORIAL MISCONDUCT, BY REFUSING TO
PRESENT THE TRUE FACTS ON THE RECORD, AND SUBPOENA THE GRAND JURY TRANSCRIPTS, AND WITNESS
STATEMENTS, BASED ON THE FACT IT APPEARS THE INDICTMENT IS FRAUD, AND IT IS NOT SIGNED BY THE U.S.
ATIORNEY, OR A GRAND JURY FOREPERSON, WHICH IS REQUIRED BY LAW TO MAKE THE DOCUMENT A TRUE
BILL.

COMES NOW Guy M. Neighbors Defendant (2) on this (\ f.... day of Febuary 2011, acting sui juris is giving
JUDICIAL NOTICES and affirms that the foregoing affidavit is True, Correct, and Complete to the best of my
knowledge and belief and not misleading.

It would appear the appellate attorney for these cases is engaged in prosectorial misconduct, by refusing to
present the TRUE facts of the case to the court, and his failure to enter several affidavit signed under the penalty
of perjury on the record, he is adding and abetting fraud on the court, and is involved in the cover up of a possible
Fraudulent Indictment that is missing Key signatures that would be required to make the document a "TRUE BILL."
Mr. Pincus is acting with Malice Intent to keep evidence OUT of the Record, and is only interested in discussing
the facts he wants to discuss, and NOT all of the facts of the case.

I'm being denied my 5th Amendment right to "Due Process" in that my attorney is adding and abetting the fraud in
District court by his refusal to demand the Grand Jury transcripts and witnesses to the Grand Jury based on the fact
there is strong evidence that will suggest the indictment was handed down Absent a Grand Jury, which is
"Extrinsic Fraud" on the court.
My attorney has failed to demand the reply from district court to the issues of the fraudulent indictment be made
under the penalty of perjury, which would Protect his client from Fraud, and he has refused to file for an appellate
bond for his client after his client requested that he do so.

My 6th Amendment Right is also being violated in that ineffective assistance of counsel, by my attorney preventing the
facts of fraud in the case from being entered into the record.
My attorney has continually made excuses for the fraud that I' have reported to him, and in the addidavits, he has
Refused to Address any of the serious issues stated therein, even though he admits my case is ODD.
This attorney has Failed his responsibility, to Protect his client!

u.s. v. Tweel, 550 F. 2d. 297 Notification of legal responsibility is "The first essential of due process of law"

My appellate attorney has encountered very serious Conflicts of Interest in that the Fraud in these cases would Expose
His fellow B.A.R. associates, and his oath to the BAR. to PROTECThis fellow BAR. members and his Oath to the
Courts, to PROTECTthe Courts interest, has interfered with the attorney's abilities to get the FRAUDinvolved in the
Case on the RECORD.
Also of Conflict is the CQVTrust that was charged in these cases without the Beneficiary's (the defendant) Consent.
If these cases were dismissed due to the fraud involved, the executors (prosecutor's and attorney's) would be stuck with
repaying the Trust that was illegally charged, and that would be Trust # 983158-310405-20026.

Kupferman v. Consolidated research & MFG. Corp. 459 F. 2d 1072 (1972)

"An attorney's loyalty to the court, as an officer thereof demands INTEGRITYand HONESTdealing with the court, and
when he departs from that standard he Prepetrates a FRAUDupon the court within savings clause of rule governing
relief from judgement or order. Fed. Rules Civ. Proc. rule 60 (b) (1,3), 28 U.S.C.A.