Prosecutor From the U.S. Department of Justice Marietta Parker Has Put An illegal Lis Pendens Lien Against The Home And Business Property Owned Defend

`Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853(p).
10th Circuit rules “substitute assets” are not subject to pre-trial restraint

Yet after the Neighbors had their home listed on the Market for nearly 7 months, finally obtain a qualified buyer, the Neighbors are notified on Feb. 21, 2008 through a title search that the prosecutor from the U.S. Department of Justice Marietta Parker has put an illegal lis pendens lien against the Home and business property owned by the defendants. Destroying the ability of the defendants to proceed with the sale of the home.

The illegal lis pendens was placed on the property September of 2007, in anticipation of a cash judgment upon conviction in a vindictive egregious case. Secretly placed absent of any legal notice through the Wichita office of the U.S. Department of Justice. When the case is from the Kansas City based U.S. Dept. of Justice.

ANNALYSIS OF THE SCHEME
Because the prosecutor Assistant United States Attorney Marietta Parker placed the Lis pendens on the property secretly absent of any legal notice and through the Wichita Office. Filed and signed under oath "secretly" under the name of a U.S. Attorney from Wichita not involved in the Yellow House case (Annette B. Gurney) Assistant U.S. Attorney Ks.S. Ct. #11602. (3...
It would appear the prosecutor has gone to great lengths to keep this order hidden. Could it be this would allow the forfeiture to be "under the table" so to speak, and allow the Prosecutor to "Launder the Money" from the sale of the property for her own personal advancement?

A VIOLATION OF RIGHTS
Not only was the Neighbors rights violated by the Lis Pendens order, their rights were further violated when the order interfered with the sale of the home. The rights of the defendants are even further violated when the prosecutor failed to notify the Neighbors with-in 60 days of the allegation of Lis pendens against the property as required by law.

PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE.
Why would an experienced prosecutor place an illegal lis pendens order against a property that had been owned by the defendants for nearly 12 years?
The 10 cir, ct. has ruled a lis pendens notice is intended to preserve property rights in existence at the time litigation commences, but does not create new or additional property rights. Additionally, under Kansas law, a lis pendens cannot be filed in “anticipation of a money judgment.” Obviously allowing such a filing would interfere with the defendants right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.