IN USA DISTRICT COURT

Case No.

PLAINTIFF:Clifford “RAY” Hackett

vs.

DEFENDANT: Jacqueline Hackett

COMPLAINT (page1 of 4)

COMES NOW the plaintiff, Clifford “RAY” Hackett, pro se, and files this complaint

FACTS PERTAINING TO THE PARTIES

Plaintiff ( USA citizen) and defendant (Alien fugitive with philippines life sentence) were married on may 2, 2002 But marriage was made fake by defendant without plaintiff’s knowledge. This was done for the purpose of marriage fraud to enter USA which is a class6 felony.

Defendant who is a resident of colorado, filed in New Mexico for divorce from plaintiff in the District Court of San Juan County, in 2010.

Defendant filed for divorce from Plaintiff in the District Court of San Juan County, New Mexico, in May, 2010 (Case No.D-1116-DM-201000791). Plaintiff was not served with divorce papers until January, 2010 by a US marshal breaking into his apartment.

Attorney Zane Swank represented Defendant, but withdrew when plaintiff proved defendant was a colorado resident..

Attorney letigra is a second lawyer hired by Mrs. Hackett , but withdrew when plaintiff proved defendant was a colorado resident.

Gina Reyes is a child support worker in Durango, 1060 E. 2nd Ave Durango, CO 81301 who was bribed by defendant to join fraud conspiracy against plaintiff and advised defendant to file in New Mexico where a judge would trade sex .

FACTS PERTAINING TO THE CASE (page2 of 4)

On or about 9- 14, 2010, defendant filed for divorce from plaintiff. She had been (stated to plaintiff) having an affair with the judge..

On this same date, prior to plaintiff being served with divorce papers, court ordered that defendant be given complete custody of the kids.

Plaintiff was not served with the summons for his divorce until January 16, 2010 when a Marshall broke into his house.

This represents a violation of Supreme Court Rule 1.9 of Rules of Professional Conduct.

Approximately 99% of the motions filed by plaintiff were denied or ignored by San Juan County Court since January 16, 2010, when he was served.

Defendant had an affair with the judge, throughout much of the divorce proceedings. Plaintiff has recordings of her admitting it.

Plaintiff was severely distraught over the intentional acts of the attorneys and judge in his divorce proceedings. His family had split up and he was blocked from his children for years. His kids in Asia are starving to death due to this fraud. The defendant couldn’t have cared less.

Mr. Hackett called the Association for Honest Attorneys for assistance in May, 2012. He was to the point that he felt his life would be better if it ended. The mental anguish and emotional distress of his divorce dragging out for years had taken its toll on his health, and he felt he was dying a slow death.

The initial filing of the divorce by defendant is invalid due to the lack of service on Plaintiff until January, 2010. Other errors exist in court paperwork.

Plaintiff is justified in his claims involving tort of outrage and outrageous government conduct in this matter. Due to such outrageous government conduct, Plaintiff has been unable to obtain effective assistance of counsel to date and must proceed pro se in this matter.

Plaintiff has demanded that defendants take action to make plaintiff whole for his losses. Defendants have refused plaintiff’s demands.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT (page3 of 4)

Defendants violated numerous national laws, statutes, ordinances and regulations, including but not limited to: due process, right not to be deprived of property under the 5th amendment (as incorporated to the states through the 14th amendment) and plaintiff’s right to be heard which was denied due to the influence of the court. The overt acts of fraud and collusion in this matter which were engaged in by the defendant to deprive plaintiff of his assets include, but are not limited to: ordering plaintiff to pay child support without a proper basis for doing so. Violations also exist concerning Supreme Court Rule 227, and plaintiff should be reimbursed by the Lawyers’ Fund for Client Protection (LFCP) for the dishonest conduct of the lawyers and judge in this matter.

This case warrants claims involving tort of outrage, bad faith, outrageous government conduct and manifest injustice. The defendant’s acts and failures to act are criminal in nature as they are indicative of legalized stealing from the plaintiff, and depict “the dagger of an assassin” in actions toward him. Accordingly, plaintiff is justified in alleging each of the following claims against the defendant.

CAUSES OF ACTION

Violations of Plaintiffs’ 5th Amendment Rights

Plaintiff incorporates by reference Exhibit A of this Petition.

Civil Conspiracy and/or Collusion

Plaintiff incorporates by reference Exhibit A of this Petition.

Fraud and Misrepresentation

Plaintiff incorporates by reference Exhibit A of this Petition.

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

Plaintiff incorporates by reference Exhibit A of this Petition.

WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully requests judgments of the court against all of the defendants awarding to plaintiff (i) damages in excess of $75,000.00 for each defendant; (ii) pre- and post-judgment interest; (iii) costs, including reasonable attorney fees, for this action; (iv) injunctive relief enjoining all defendants from continuing the intentional infliction of emotional distress; and (v) any other relief deemed just and equitable by the court.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff respectfully requests that the issues in this matter be heard by a jury.

DESIGNATION OF TRIAL

Plaintiff designates Hawaii as the location for the trial in this matter.