Riverside County Retaliation, RICO, and Fraud: Verified Affidavits Confirm Fraud, RICO, and Constitutional Violations by Riverside County’s Michael Hestrin and Miranda Thomson and Riverside County Sheriff

Riverside County Retaliation, RICO, and Fraud: Verified Affidavits Confirm Fraud, RICO, and Constitutional Violations by Riverside County’s Michael Hestrin and Miranda Thomson and Riverside County Sheriff

In a devastating turn of events for state actors in Riverside County, California, a series of unrebutted affidavits and federally recognized legal filings have revealed a coordinated, unlawful, and criminal conspiracy to violate the constitutional rights of Kevin Lewis Walker, a private American national and non-citizen State Citizen. The facts—now entered into the record, verified, unrebutted, and legally binding—expose a scheme so corrupt and retaliatory that it qualifies as organized racketeering, judicial fraud, and attempted extortion under color of law.


⚖️ Federal Lawsuit Already Filed—State “Charges” Are Retaliatory and Criminal

On March 11, 2025, Walker filed Federal Lawsuit Case No. 5:25−cv−00646−WLH−MAA, asserting claims under:

  • 42 U.S.C. § 1983 – Deprivation of rights

  • 18 U.S.C. § 241 – Conspiracy against rights

  • 18 U.S.C. § 242 – Deprivation of rights under color of law

  • 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961–1968 – Racketeering (RICO)

Just three days later, in what can only be described as an act of prosecutorial revenge, the State filed a fraudulent “charge” against Walker, using a fake, unsigned, and unverified instrument, devoid of lawful jurisdiction, lawful authority, or any admissible evidence of wrongdoing.

This alone proves malicious prosecution, obstruction of justice, and an attempt to interfere with a pending federal civil rights action—a federal felony in and of itself.

Riverside County -- EXPOSED: Verified Affidavits Uncover Criminal Conspiracy, Mail Fraud, and Extortion in Retaliatory Prosecution Against Kevin Lewis Walker

DOWNLOAD DOCUMENT

 

Kevin_Walker_Estate_et_al_v_Chad__cacdce-25-00646__0001.0.pdf

Screen Shot 2025 03 26 at 2.53.00 PM

Screen Shot 2025 03 26 at 2.53.06 PM

Screen Shot 2025 03 26 at 2.53.12 PM


🧾 Fraudulent “Charges” from Inexperienced Prosecutor and DA’s Office Violate Federal Law

The fabricated citation and charge—issued in the name of Miranda Thomson, an attorney who only joined the bar in November of 2024, and under the auspices of Riverside County District Attorney Michael Hestrin—is not signed by either party or any judicial authority. This fact alone renders the document legally defective, coercive, and evidentiary of fraud.

The absence of a signature is not a clerical error—it is an admission of liability and concealment of personal accountability. The use of Thomson’s name without verification, combined with DA Hestrin’s official office as the cover for the scheme, only strengthens the accusation that this was a malicious attempt to extort Walker and interfere with federal judicial proceedings.

Delivered via U.S. Mail, and issued without proper authority, the fraudulent “charge” constitutes:

  • Mail Fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1341)

  • Extortion under the Hobbs Act (18 U.S.C. § 1951)

  • Forgery and impersonation (18 U.S.C. § 1028)

  • False official document and unauthorized instrument use

  • Securities Fraud, Wire Fraud, and Violation of Constitutional Process

These are not technicalities—they are federal felonies, and the failure to sign the instrument removes any protection or privilege from the issuing parties.

Fraudulent, extortionate, treasonous notice by Miranda THomson and District Attorney Michael Hestrin

Fraudulent, extortionate, treasonous notice by Miranda THomson and District Attorney Michael Hestrin


📑 Verified Affidavits Serve as Judicial Estoppel and Prima Facie Evidence

Walker’s Verified Notice of Conditional Acceptance is backed by four notarized Affidavit Contracts and Security Agreements—none of which have been rebutted. Under UCC § 3-505, Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (1963), and commercial law, the silence of the Plaintiff constitutes:

  • Tacit acquiescence

  • Dishonor

  • Estoppel by silence

  • Absolute legal admission of guilt and wrongdoing

Moreover, Walker’s instrument has been notarized, registered, and indorsed—qualifying it as a special deposit, monetary instrument, and lawful bond under U.C.C. § 3-104 and 31 U.S.C. § 5312, fully satisfying Rule 67 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.


🔥 Crimes Established by Admission and Default

Due to the Plaintiff’s failure to provide verified rebuttals or proof of claim, the following crimes are legally and factually established as of record:

  • Fraud and Fraud on the Court

  • Mail Fraud and Wire Fraud

  • Extortion and Attempted Extortion

  • Conspiracy to Deprive Rights (18 U.S.C. § 241)

  • Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law (18 U.S.C. § 242)

  • Securities Fraud and Unlawful Instrument Usage

  • Kidnapping, Unlawful Seizure, and False Arrest

  • Obstruction of Justice and Retaliation for Protected Activity

  • Identity Theft and Forgery

  • RICO Violations

  • Constitutional Treason


📣 the Kevin Walker Estate and Kevin Walker Demands Dismissal, Sanctions, and DOJ Criminal Prosecution

Walker has issued formal demand for:

  • Immediate dismissal with prejudice

  • Judicial sanctions and personal liability against all participating parties

  • Restitution in the amount of $100,000,000.00

  • Criminal referral to the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General, and Civil Rights Division

He further declares that any failure to respond constitutes final legal default, and that the Verified Notice itself shall stand as prima facie evidence of criminal activity and serve as the judgment in equity and law.


⚠️ Conclusion: The Record Is Final—And the Fraud Is Now Public

This is not merely a legal dispute—it is an exposé of judicial corruption, lawless prosecution, and state-sponsored extortion. The affidavits are unrebutted. The charges are unsigned. The issuing party is inexperienced. The supervising office is silent. The law is violated in full view of the public record.

Every government agent, official, and agency involved is now on notice. The record stands. The evidence is verified. And the Constitution demands justice.

See: Federal One Trillion Dollar ‘Right to Travel’ and RICO Lawsuit Filed Against Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, Gregory Eastwood, Robert Bowman, William Pratt, and Others

Leave your vote

3414513 points
More

Don’t Stop Here

More To Explore

Screen Shot 2025 07 08 at 9.35.01 PM

EMERGENCY PETITION FOR WRIT MANDAMUS VANISHES: Ninth Circuit Fraud, Tampering, Judicial Collusion, and a Federal Cover-Up Seems Unequivocal

Federal courts are now under scrutiny after a verified Writ of Mandamus vanished from the Ninth Circuit docket without explanation—raising grave concerns of judicial tampering, fraud, and systemic misconduct. Judge Sunshine Sykes defied clear jurisdictional divestiture by issuing rulings on a matter under appellate review, violating 28 U.S.C. § 144 and § 1651. This article exposes a disturbing pattern of ultra vires acts, denial of due process, and potential RICO violations implicating both district and appellate judges.Ask ChatGPT

lawful tender discharges the debt

When the Debt Is Discharged but the LIEN Remains: Why Auto and Home Loan Lenders Who Ignore Lawful Tender Are Committing Fraud and Commercial Crimes

This article delivers a devastating legal breakdown proving that lawful tender—once made and unrebutted—discharges auto loan debt under UCC §§ 3-601, 3-603, 3-310, 2-206, and 1-103, as codified in Cal. Com. Code §§ 3601, 3603, 3310, 2206, 1103, Fla. Stat. §§ 673.6011, 673.6031, 673.3101, 672.206, 671.103, and N.C.G.S. §§ 25-3-601, 25-3-603, 25-3-310, 25-2-206, 25-1-103. It exposes refusal to release a lien after lawful discharge as actionable fraud, conversion, embezzlement, and obstruction under state and federal law. With verified case law and commercial principles, it explains how silence equals acceptance and how creditors become commercially estopped. A must-read for secured parties, fiduciaries, and equity claimants demanding lien removal, declaratory relief, and commercial remedy.

Screen Shot 2025 06 28 at 4.55.33 PM

How a Perfected Security Agreement and UCC Filings Strip Servicers of Foreclosure Rights

A properly executed Security Agreement assigning all assets, rights, and interests to a private trust—paired with a UCC-1 financing statement and UCC-3 amendment claiming the Deed of Trust and Note—lawfully establishes the trust as the secured party and real party in interest. This perfected interest, under UCC §§ 9-203, 9-509, 3-301, and supported by controlling case law (e.g., Carpenter v. Longan, Ibanez, Veal), strips any servicer or third-party of standing to foreclose unless they possess the original Note, prove an unbroken chain of title, and rebut the trust’s perfected claim. Without that, all foreclosure attempts become void ab initio, commercial dishonor, and legal trespass on private trust property.

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.

error: Content is protected !!