◆ SpookStack

have prior knowledge, “ Did mention that professional>+--people he had spoken to can't be wrong *, and did eventually provide the plaintiff with the location, in Florida, of the United Methodist Church, that Janice Fortin was attending, Stating that this church had called for the transfer of membersnip, ( there was never an official joining of this church as members, just worship) he at that time thought it strange too,as neither her or I were officially members, and there was no=membership. Plaintiff states that with this information, provided on a good will basis by Reverand Williams, he dia attempt reconciliation in Florida, did attend Service at this Church(United Methodist) in Florida, in November 1981,did meet and talk of reconciliation, with Janice Fortin, and that the situation was one of an admitt- ance of Paranoia, or leave. Plaintiff charges tnat the parents of Janice Fortin, and Janice Fortin ( Defendant Walter Dupree-~ to be served later after discovery) did want the plaintift " To Jump, and in some form’,with three witnesses present admit by witness, an act of paranoia,"and bribery was mentroned~Money- Paris-John- Paris, meaning trips to Europe, Etc." was stated by Janice Fortin, as the only means of reconciliation. Plaintiff leaving and returning to RI, after a few days, and prief (2) conversations, Detendant Walter Dupre--attempting 4 confrontation, and plaintiff did not wish one--he left. Plaintiff further states tnat ne did return to Florida prior to Christmas of 1981, a combined trip of business and to talk again with the defendant Janice Fortin, if possible, and seek reconciliation or a divorce. Plaintiff charges that he was harassed by parties unknown"John Does", while in the Fort Pierce area and elsewhere, and that on this second attempt, he did never see Janice Fortin, only her Son Randy, did leave christmas presents, at her home with her son, and was assaulted, though not harmed by her son. He did then also return to RI. Divorce proceedings were started br attorneys for Janice Fortin, and there was alaw suit--droppec over false notorization of signature of divorce papers, harass- ment and intimidation from these same Lawyers, mainly One Allen Dworkin,Esq., Defendant this case, who did also spread malicious slander and gossip about the plaintiff,in conspiracy to cover- up for his involvement in this issue. And that eventually divorce papers were received py the plaintiff, through: Counsel Charlies Rennick,Esq., in May of 1983, of a dubious nature, plaintiff never being informed ‘nor his counsel Rennick, of the intitiating of these proceedings. Plaintiff states that this divorce was completed as of December 29th,1982. And that in further checks, he could not obtain the address of Janice Fortin from the Court in Indian River County, who did state that tney had none--and in calls to ner Attorney on this document, none were returned. This attempt was in May of 1983 1ag6tabtempe Short of the law Suits KC¥2-96,and KC82-703, and that all attempts to locate this defendant/witness have been blocked to the plaintiff,even as Stated by Judge DiRobbio, in testimony on the Stand, in March of 1986. However Plaintiff Charges that through this Minister Williams and United Washington Methodists Church and with the knowledge (67) renee