John Christiana’s Strategy For Legal Victory for Targeted Individuals in California (From Targetedjustice.com and Christiana’s email correspondence)

TargetedJustice.com is currently researching and preparing a civil action lawsuit on the federal level representing the participating class of victims of Directed Energy Weapons and other federal abuses.

But torts and abuses on the local level have their own defendants and their own causes of action particular to that victim so could not be part of a national class action. Targeted Justice will soon have the information and sample templates for victims to use on the local level.

Here is how John (Jack) Christiana got to this point of lawsuits against local city and county governments based on a common tort that will survive early dismissal motions, yet it is still directly related to the targeting, because it was the targeting that led to the common law torts. Therefore discovery including interrogatories, documents, and written depositions are available.

Jack lived in Laguna Beach and his parents and family live in Huntington Beach. Both are in Orange County. Current Defendants that did common torts and also related to Jack’s targeting include:

City of Huntington Beach and Police Chief Robert Handy (himself).
False imprisonment (police unjustified wrongful detainment), intentional inflectional of emotional distress (IIED), negligence.

City of Laguna Beach and Corporal Jason Farris,
County of Orange and Mental Health Employee William Crittenden
Trespass to Chattels (infringe on my property in smallest way), Stalking, Intimidation and Tampering of Victim, IIED, negligence.

Here are the actions by Plaintiff Jack and the above Defendants:
SKILL = Intentional Actions we do.
LUCK = Actions out of our control.

1) SKILL – Jack went to law school for two years to learn civil law and procedure.
2) SKILL – Jack got a PET scan by a licensed medical doctor to prove no illness.
3) SKILL – Jack sent multiple emails to city council and county supervisors.
4) SKILL – Jack spoke at multiple city council and county supervisor meetings.
5) GOOD LUCK – Defendants above then committed harassment and other abuses.
6) SKILL – Jack set up surveillance both video and audio to catch all 3 defendants.
7) SKILL Jack filed lawsuits properly writing causes of action.

Targeted Justice will fight on the federal level. And Targeted Justice will also be supplying legal information to fight on the local level. But it is up to Targeted Individuals to take steps as well. It is up to YOU and YOUR actions, using YOUR skill. Jack will be sharing as much as possible from law school so you can skip that step from the above list.

It is time for victims to fight back. Jack Christiana’s California Case:

Chronology:

January 2018: Targeted Individual wins Demurrer Hearing in court. Jack Christiana has won a courtroom victory in his case against the Chief of Police and the City of Huntington Beach. The evidence was so overwhelming in Mr. Christiana’s favor that the defendant’s attorney defaulted out of appearing in court, calling Christiana on his cellphone as he was driving to the court hearing that he does not need to appear. This proves that Targeted Individuals can win battles in court.

This is a court case in progress now moving into the Voir Dire (jury selection) phase. The trick to writing the complaint is properly writing the Cause of Action. The City informed Christiana that they will not challenge the False Imprisonment Claim. But they will demurrer (object to) the Intentional and Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED) (NIED) claims, which are related to Jack Christiana being a Targeted Individual and the harassment and intimidation by the police and the police chief himself. The City objected to Christiana’s background facts explaining the harassment by the police. The Court agreed with Christiana and overruled the Demurrer and denied the Motion to Strike.

What is even more surprising is that Jack Christiana filed his complaint against Police Chief Robert Handy on May 3, 2017. Then the Rank and File Police Officers of the City of Huntington Beach vote in August of 2017 by a 92% margin (207-18) they have “No Confidence” in the police chief and want him removed. http://www.ocweekly.com/news/handy-smacked-again-8656260

Then further in December of 2017 the Huntington Beach Police Department’s Captains and Lieutenants “overwhelming” demanded that Defendant Police Chief Robert Handy be removed. This was the first time in their history they have done this. Los Angeles Times Article: http://www.latimes.com/socal/daily-pilot/news/tn-dpt-me-chief-handy-20171220-story.html

Here is the actual Minute Order of the Court 12/22/17:

CASE NO: 30-2017-00918017-CU-NP-CJC
CASE INIT.DATE: 05/03/2017
CASE TITLE: Christiana vs. City of Huntington Beach
CASE CATEGORY: Civil – Unlimited CASE TYPE: Non-PI/PD/WD tort – Other

The Court, having taken the above-entitled matter under submission on 12/18/2017 and having fully considered the arguments of all parties, both written and oral, as well as the evidence presented, now rules as follows:

Defendant’s:
1. Demurrer to 1st Amended Complaint
The court overrules defendants’ demurrer to the 2nd cause of action for IIED and the 3rd cause of action for NIED.

The circumstances alleged by plaintiff, the contentious history between the parties, the allegation that the detention was based on a knowing falsehood (that plaintiff had been in the closet), along with the place and location of the detention (at City Hall when plaintiff was attempting to complain about defendants), make the issue of whether the alleged conduct was outrageous a question of fact which is not properly resolved on demurrer. As to the negligent infliction of emotional distress cause of action, defendant correctly notes that this is really just a cause of action for negligence. The question is thus whether defendant owed plaintiff a duty to avoid negligently causing him emotional distress. And, defendant has not cited authority establishing that a police officer/agency cannot be sued for negligence in the context of an allegedly wrongful detention. Burgess v. Superior Court (1992) 2 Cal.4th 1064, cited by defendant, involved whether a mother could seek emotional distress for injuries suffered by her baby during delivery. Potter v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. (1993) 6 Cal.4th 965, involved plaintiffs exposed to toxic substances who were seeking emotional stress for fear of getting cancer. Neither of these cases is analogous to the circumstances here.

2. Motion to Strike
The court denies defendants’ Motion to Strike the background facts and claim for punitive damages. Defendants’ Request for Judicial Notice of the 9-30-16 government claim is granted. The First Amended Complaint makes it clear plaintiff’s claim for damages is based on the February 2017 incident and that the facts alleged regarding the parties’ prior history are provided as background. In addition, these facts are relevant to both the outrageous conduct element of the IIED cause of action and the malice element of the claim for punitive damages. And, the facts alleged are sufficient to plead malice. Court orders Clerk to give notice.
CASE UPDATE:
Christiana vs. City of Huntington Beach, Police Chief Robert Handy
Monday, January 29, 2018: Case Management Conference

CLAIMS: False Imprisonment, Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress

After conferring with both parties, the Court chose a date for the Jury Trial. The judge told Jack that he is the attorney and he will be treated as the attorney.

But the judge also lectured Christiana sternly but properly that as the lawyer, he needs to know all Code of Civil Procedure, California Rules of Court, local rules, and court procedure. The judge does not want excuses. The judge then told Christiana he wants to be informed what jury instructions Christiana plans to use before the trial starts. There was a forecast of the length of the trial but the judge also allowed for Christiana to extend the length of the trial within reason.
Picture
We are still early in this process.

We understand you have many questions and suggestions. Please understand that we are very early in this process and are developing the requirements for presenting our case. Your support and patience are requested. This is a large effort and we are working diligently to achieve a successful outcome.

Thanks for your support.

There are at least 3 ways to win – per se, that is all on their own can win. Targeted Justice will be addressing all of these, either by action or guidance/information.

1) Federal. Targeted Justice is working on this. We have many doing the medical, tech, science, DEWs, etc. we will need this for the case. THE OTHER ISSUE I have said repeatedly is Subject Matter Jurisdiction. I am not aware if anyone has addressed it and actually sued on it, even though that is the court’s finding over and over (“too fantastic” and frivolous). I am not giving away the store or our strategy. This is just plain kindergarten level intelligence. It was just about a month ago that I developed a strategy on this and how to win that so we can all get our legitimate day in court. After all, it was the founding fathers that wrote the Declaration of Independence with 27 gripes in the middle of the document. The biggest was the mock joke trials, which is happening now to Targeted individuals. It will be addressed. No problem.

2) Local lawsuits. I agree with prior comments that past TI wins are not really wins. There are quite a few of these mistruths of prior cases winning. Winning is setting a precedent that others can use. I have 3 lawsuits currently. On the first, I have gotten past the early motions of demurrer and motion to strike which were big because it allowed me to include the targeting issues related to what police and officials did to me. If I would have lost that hearing in December, I still would have moved forward to trial but the targeted individual part would have been diminished. The highest priority for me is not money or personal grudges, although that could come with the territory. No I want to fight so these can be used by others.

2) I am also using a strategy that I am not aware others have used on the local level. I have names and I know people involved. The power of under oath and discovery, interrogatories, oral depositions, written depositions of third parties, and more.

3) We are getting this third part going now. Public awareness, organizing evidence, case law, law, FBI, CIA, NSA whistle blowers, expert witnesses, templates for email, templates for speaking, affidavits, contacting Senators and Congressmen and women, local and federal. Matter of time. This could be the “Did you order the Code Red?” moment to Colonel Nathan Jessup that wins it – with the threat of those witnesses from the air field (our lawsuits and under oath testimony for them) that forces them to admit it. But those airmen were not going to testify to anything and our lawsuits are real. And happening now.

Jack

John Christiana