2008

Mark Brivik Sues FDLE After Botched Up and ill founded Investigation

False and untrue allegations made by former partners for their own financial gain fails!

Mark Brivik Completely Exonerated by State Attorney

Brivik Never Charged or Arraigned, Sues for Damages.

MARK BRIVIK FILES NEW LAWSUIT FOR DAMAGES, AFTER DECISION TO WITHRAW CHARGES

STATE ATTORNEY CONFIRMS MARK BRIVIK DID NOT VIOLATE ANY LAWS OR SECURITY STATUTES

MARK BRIVIK FILED A LAWSUIT AGAINST FDLE OFFICER CLAUDIA LAW AFTER THE STATE ATTORNEY CONCLUDED MARK BRIVIK DID NOT VIOLATE ANY LAWS INCLUDING ANY FLORIDA SECURITY LAWS.

THE ARREST WAS WITHOUT ANY BASIS AND WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE OR ARGUABLE PROBABLE CAUSE. BRIVIK WAS FALSELY ACCUSED OF VIOLATING FLORIDA SECURITY STATUTES INCLUDING 517.07.

OFFICER CLAUDIA LAW CHOSE TO IGNORE THE FACT THAT THE TRANSACTION WAS EXEMPT UNDER THE FLORIDA SECURITY STATUTE 517.061. IN ADDITION THE LAWSUIT ACCUSES FDLE AGENT CLAUDIA LAW OF DELIBERATELY FALSIFYING AND MANIPULATING THE FACTS WITH THE INTENTION OF MISLEADING A JUDGE TO SIGN A FALSE WARRANT

In civil Case

Assistant Attorney General, Michael Moore's Deposition Contradicts Claudia Law's Statements to the Court

Assistant Attorney General's Evidence Supports Mark Brivik's Contention that Claudia Law Fabricated and Manipulated the facts.
"At this juncture, Plaintiff stresses that it is recognized that society would like to believe that police officers tell the truth. They protect our society and we need them to be truthful. However, the instant motion practice demonstrates that Officer Law was neither accurate in her motion practice or in her dealings with the Plaintiff. Officer Law represented that Attorney Moore told Law that the Plaintiff committed a felony. This is false. Further, Officer Law suggested that there was a proper inference to be derived from Attorney Moore’s representations. This was also false – pursuant to Moore’s own testimony"

Brivik Sues FDLE agent Claudia Law and former partners in Federal Court for false arrest.

Motion Made, on Brivik's Behalf, Detailing Claudia Law's Falsified Affidavit to State Judge

What happened to me; True facts of a botched-up investigation
The co-investors concocted bogus criminal allegations against MB as part of a conniving plan to get out from under their obligations in a real estate deal following the real estate market crash. Prior to them contacting law enforcement, they approached MB to participate in their unscrupulous plan. Their plan was dishonest, and MB was not interested in being a party to it and refused to have anything to do with it. In order for their plan to succeed, MB had to be discredited in order not to be a solid strong witness against them.
The co-investors communicated under oath false allegations to the law enforcement officer. The law enforcement officer performed a reckless and pathetic investigation without checking any documentation and with an absolute disregard for the facts and the truth.
After the review by the State Attorney of all the documents and interviewing the Law Officer and the co-investors, the State Attorney came to the decision that there was no basis at all for the arrest and the file was closed.
All the co-investors were effectively co-conspirators and had their own motives for asserting their own false allegations. The law officer had her own motives too. MB was a well-respected member in the community and she knew that this would be a high-profile case and this would create a large amount of publicity which could promote her career by “catching this big fish.”

One of the big motives of the co-conspirators was not only to create a false basis for grounds to sue the attorneys with the hope of recovering their investment but also to attempt to steal MB’s investment of $1.8 million.

The co-investors knew that what they alleged was false but attempted to use the criminal system to intimidate and frighten MB into submission. They even made false allegations against MB’s wife as a further scare tactic.

After review of all the documents by the State Attorney’s office, it was clear that there was no evidence at all that MB did anything wrong.

In 2005, a group of sophisticated investors knowingly and voluntarily went in together in a joint venture to purchase and develop a parcel of land in the Sarasota/Bradenton area. In an effort to regain lost equity from the market crash, a gentleman named this group believed that a bogus lawsuit against the firm of attorneys that conducted the closing would bring them 5.5 million dollars.

They wanted to reclaim their money by:

a.) Suing the bank
b.) Suing the law firm
c.) Suing the appraiser

None of these entities were at fault and did nothing wrong. In order to justify this action, the partners wanted Mark to side with them in this devious and dishonest plan.

Mark disavowed their actions, knowing it was deceitful and not truthful. Upon his refusal to side with them, the partners conducted a willful, concerted and contemptible smear campaign to lie and mislead authorities as to the role Mark played in the transaction by using the press as their mouthpiece.

Additionally, the partners found an unscrupulous FDLE official who fabricated and manipulated events that led to the illegal and wrongful arrest of Mark.

Mark and a team of lawyers vigorously pursued the illegal arrest. After reviewing all the relevant documents, the State Attorney and the Attorney General's office concluded that his arrest was unlawful and that he did not violate any laws and was falsely accused.

The State Attorney also concluded that the partners had made false statements under oath during interviews with authorities and that the FDLE official deliberately and knowingly falsified and manipulated the facts with the intent of misleading a judge to sign and issue a false arrest warrant.

Very important Mark was never charged, never arraigned, and the case never even went to court and was immediately absolved of all wrongdoing.

In fact, the attorneys and Mark are working on publishing a case study of this case to be used in law schools and among lawyers as an example of the misappropriation of the power of arrest warrants and the abuse of the system by law enforcement. It will stand as a warning to people as to the capriciousness of the legal system and its effect on law-abiding citizens and their rights.

Charges Dropped in Manatee Land Case

Sarasota - An Orlando man accused of defrauding investors on a failed residential development in Manatee County will not face criminal charges.

By Duane Marsteller - dmarsteller@bradenton.com

Sarasota - An Orlando man accused of defrauding investors on a failed residential development in Manatee County will not face criminal charges.

Prosecutors declined to file formal charges against Mark A. Brivik, 56, ending a complex, six-month legal case.

"He's enormously relieved," Orlando attorney Rodolfo Celis said of his client Wednesday. "I'm thrilled for him, that this black cloud hanging over his head was lifted."

Incarcerate claim by Mr. Braga of the Sarasota Times-Herald is: that Mr. Brivik warrant pending in South Africa.

Yet another complete disregard for the facts and truth. With proper research, the truth about South Africa would have been shown. The truth, however, would not put the correct spin on what the writer wanted to achieve.

The Truth

Therefore, the National Prosecuting Authority of South Africa (equivalent to our Attorney General) confirmed no warrant was issued or pending.
In reaction to the Sarasota Times-Herald Article, Mr. Brivik felt compelled to officially disprove the inaccurate statement to its readers by retaining an attorney and a senior counsel (equivalent to a Senior Counsel in the UK) to meet with the Prosecuting Authority to obtain the written confirmation that there is no pending warrant of arrest existed and confirmation of the decision to decline any prosecution.
VIEW CASE FILE