Tuesday, October 14, 2014

3rd Follow up PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS‎ - Cause No. CR203-1336M - STATE OF MISSOURI, Plaintiff, v. DAVID G. JEEP, Defendant

Delivered - October 16, 2014 , 10:35 am - CAMDENTON, MO 65020

First-Class Mail® Certified Mail™ Label Number: 70141820000180195027

Bruce Colyer, Associate Circuit Judge
c/o Jo McElwee, Circuit Clerk
1 Court Circle, Suite 8
Camdenton, MO 65020

Re: 3rd Follow up PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS‎ - Cause No. CR203-1336M - STATE OF MISSOURI, Plaintiff, v. DAVID G.  JEEP, Defendant

Dear Sir,

I just wanted to AGAIN REMIND you of your primary MORAL and CONSTITUTIONAL obligation, as a Judicial Officer, is to "establish Justice" under color of law.[1]  I am fully aware of just how corrupt you and your Black Robed Royalist Brethren have become. 

Now I fully admit that nearly 11 years ago I believed in the integrity of the court system.  I believed that the court system held tightly to its own integrity and constitutional commitment to establish justice.  BUT NO MORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am herewith providing documentation of your sincere ignorance, conscientious stupidity, malice and corruption as regards your judicial action in 2004 on Cause No. CR203-1336M - STATE OF MISSOURI, Plaintiff, v. DAVID G.  JEEP, Defendant.  Those items are:

1.    A digital, certified by the petitioner, copy of post-trial 18-point presentencing motion that describes in detail the above documented sincere ignorance, conscientious stupidity, CRIMINAL perjury, CRIMINAL cover up and CRIMINAL malfeasance in office of all involved that I sent you, Judge Bruce Colyer, on the 9th day of February, 2004 

2.    A copy of a 9 page letter I sent you, Judge Colyer, dated Thursday February 12, 2004 before sentencing exposing the criminal perjury.  The letter includes:

a.    Cover letter explanation

b.    Copy of the PRETRIAL MOTION, dated September 14, 2003, requesting exculpable evidence[2] that were unconstitutionally denied under you're the sincere ignorance, conscientious stupidity, malice and corruption of your order.

c.    Copies of the NHTSA 2002 Cover page, "Procedures for Walk-and-Turn Testing" - section on 4 confirming the 2" heel condition, acquired after trial from other sources that were unconstitutionally denied under your sincere ignorance, conscientious stupidity, malice and corruption of your order. (Cover and pages VIII9 – VIII11)

d.    Copies of the NHTSA 2002 "Procedures for One-Leg-Stand Testing" section on 4 confirming the 2" heel condition, acquired after trial from other sources that were unconstitutionally denied under your sincere ignorance, conscientious stupidity, malice and corruption of your order. (Cover and pages VIII12 – VIII14)

3.    Copies, 2 pages of the Tim Taylor's (Officer Badge #913) police statements dated 5/18/03 (2 pages) confirming the 15 second uninterrupted blow.   

4.    Copy of the receipt for "Personal Property Taken" signed by Officer Little and the petitioner affirming that "boots" were taken off the petitioner at lock up on 5/17/03.

5.    Copies of the trial transcript confirming the false conviction at trial by way of:

a.    Cover Page of the certified trial transcript and index (2 pages)

b.    Alex Little's (Officer Badge #920) perjured[3] testimony regarding the testing procedures heel issue, based on the denied requests for exculpable evidence made pretrial that should have been known by the prosecution and the police officer because it had been highlighted by the constitutional PRETRIAL MOTIONS requesting exculpable evidence that were unconstitutionally denied under your sincere ignorance, conscientious stupidity, malice and corruption of your order (page 85).

c.    Copies of the trial transcript confirming the perjured[4] testimony of "huffing and puffing" based on the sworn conflicting police statements of Tim Taylor (Officer Badge #913) that should have been known by the prosecution (Pages 119-121).

6.    A listing of the actions taken by the petitioner starting in 2004 and still ongoing to expose your sincere ignorance, conscientious stupidity, malice and corruption.

If there is anything further I can do for you in this regard, please let me know.

Thank you in advance.

"Time is of the essence"

 David G. Jeep

 enclosure
 cc:  My Blog - Tuesday, October 14, 2014, 5:03:20 PM

In the Circuit Court of Camden County, Missouri
Associate Circuit Judge Division
Before the Honorable Bruce Colyer, Judge


State of Missouri,
                     Plaintiff,
            vs.
David G. Jeep,
                    Defendant


Case No.:CR203-1336M

       


Motion to overturn the Verdict in favor of the Defendant

The testimony by the State's witnesses was in some cases
Wholly inaccurate, wantonly and unashamedly prejudicial without foundation, conflicting and borderline perjurious.
1.  Comes now the defendant to state his case and ask the court to overturn the verdict in favor of the defendant.  The defendant asks for a new verdict of innocent in his favor and without prejudice or limitation to all issues of guilt that were and are related to this case.

2.  Officer Little under direct cross examination gave inaccurate testimony in front of the jury.  He repeatedly stated while under oath that it was a 4" heel not the 2" heel that required notification and opportunity for the removal of said shoes prior to taking of both the Walk and Turn and the One Leg Stand field sobriety tests.

3.  I submit that the National Highway and Safety Administration standard requires "individuals wearing heels more than two inches high should be given the opportunity to remove their shoes."

4.  This as a fact is indisputably a part of the National Highway and Safety Administration Standard.

5.  This I submit was known by officer Little or should have been known by any officer having more 50 hours National Highway and Safety Administration Standardized Field Sobriety Testing training within the last 24 months.

6.  His offering of inaccurate information in direct contradiction of the Standard and the direct under oath cross examination and assertion of the defendant as to an inaccurate information as fact was to say the least wantonly prejudicial without foundation.

7.  Without a credibly admiistered complete Field Sobriety Test the States case rest on nothing. They presented no other evidence of the Defendant's intoxication, there for the verdict in the case should be overturned without prejudice.  The state misrepresented either through malice of forethought or ignorance either way their prosecution was based on misinformation and not factual evidence.

8.  As an officer of the court, Officer Little should be held to a higher standard as a professional presuming to give professional reliable testimony in a court of law under oath.

9.  Officer Little failed that test in that he repeatedly asserted inaccurate testimony either through knowing deception or an unacceptable level of ignorance.

10. In Officer Taylor's 913 sworn verbal testimony, in front of the jury, he knowingly contradicted his prior signed statement dated 5/18/03 titled Supplemental Report as approved by Matt Schwenn #915.  Please see attached copy of said report.

11. When asked had the Defendant blown (a steady tone) for 15-16 seconds during the test administered in regard to this issue, Officer Taylor 913 repeatedly offered testimony conflicting with his Supplemental report signed by T. Taylor 913 on each page of the two page report and dated 5/18/03.

12. This sworn testimony was prejudicial in front of the jury.  The defendant repeatedly asked Officer Taylor 913 to confirm that the defendant had blown for 15 seconds and he repeatedly refused to confirm his signed and approved Supplemental Report dated 5/18/04.

13. Without Officer Taylor's denial of his previous report, the state has no evidence of a refusal.  The defendant clearly blew 15-16 seconds per officer Taylor's singed and approved report dated 5/18/03 just after the incident and the State's own representative from the State's Division of Health, Breath Alcohol Department testified that a 15 second blow fell to the upper end of the credible range she reported as 7-17 seconds for the average blow.

14. In that Officer Taylor 913 had in effect sworn to the facts in his Supplemental Report and then contradicted said report again in Sworn Testimony in front of the jury his action are borderline perjurious.  And the evidence he provided was therefore suspect and without foundation.

15. As an officer of the court, Officer Taylor 913 should be held to a higher standard as a professional presuming to give professional reliable testimony in a court of law under oath.

16. In that the defense had no way of knowing in advance that the prosecution was going to purport misinformation and what can be construed as outright lies or contradictions of previously reported facts the defendant can not be held to a verdict based on a false prosecution.  Therefore the defendant requests the court enter a verdict in favor the defendant's innocents without prejudice or limitation on the issue and all matters related to this issue.

17. In a closely consider case on which the jury ponder for considerable amount of time, this wantonly and unashamedly prejudicial conduct had a deleterious effect on the defendant's case and therefore I ask that you to take judicial exception to the verdict and issue a verdict of innocents in the defendant's favor.

18. Because of the above referenced unreliable and potentially criminal, wantonly and unashamedly prejudicial testimony of the state's sworn officers of the court in front of the jury hearing the case, I here by ask that the court take judicial exception to the verdict and render a new verdict of innocents without limitation in the defendants favor including all issues and connected issues that were and are related to this issue before the court. 
Dated this 9th day of February, 2004
David G. Jeep
16359D Lakefield Place
Grover, MO 63040

The above is a digital representation of the 18-point presentencing motion that was sent to Judge Colyer 9th day of February, 2004.  The signature of the petitioner below swears to this as fact!

 ____________________________________
David G. Jeep




[2] Brady v. Maryland, 373 U. S. 83 (1963) "We now hold that the suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due process where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment, irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution."
"The rule of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U. S. 83, arguably applies in three quite different situations. Each involves the discovery, after trial, of information which had been known to the prosecution but unknown to the defense.
In the first situation, typified by Mooney v. Holohan, 294 U. S. 103, the undisclosed evidence demonstrates that the prosecution's case includes perjured testimony and that the prosecution knew, or should have known, of the perjury.




























--
Thanks in advance,
To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process
"Agere sequitur esse"
"Time is  of the essence"
David G. Jeep
http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/
My E-mail addresses are David.G.Jeep@GMail.com orDGJeep01@yahoo.com

(314) 514-5228

David G. Jeep
GENERAL DELIVERY
Saint Louis , MO 63155-9999

Denied - Petition for Writ of Certiorari No. 14-5551, Title: David Gerard Jeep, Petitioner v. United States





Monday, October 6, 2014

A Petition for Rehearing - Petition for Writ of Certiorari 14-5551 David Jeep v. Government of United States EMPHASIS “a Republican Form of Government,” [7] “cruel and unusual punishments”[8] and “involuntary servitude”[9] that “a four-year-old[10]” could understand

DELIVERED -OCTOBER 10, 2014 , 10:39 AM - WASHINGTON, DC 20543

First-Class Mail® Certified Mail™ Label Number: 7014-1820-0001-8019-5041

_  _______________________________________________________________
No.   14-5551                              
Eastern Missouri U.S. District Court Case No. 4:13-cv-02490-RWS
_  _______________________________________________________________
PETITIONER FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI
David G. Jeep and heir Petitioners
v.
RESPONDENT(S) ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI
The Government of the United States of America, et al, Defendants/Respondents
_  _______________________________________________________________
A Petition for Rehearing – Petition for Writ of Certiorari 14-5551[1]
_______________________________________________________________  _

For your re-consideration I submit three points that were just recently apparent, to the pro se indigent petitioner, and not made an issue in the original petition:

1.)    "Republican Form of Government,"[2]
      a.)  ""The germ of destruction of our nation is in the power of the judiciary,
             an irresponsible (i.e., unrepresentative) body - working like gravity by
             night and day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing
            it's noiseless step like a thief over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall
            render powerless the checks of one branch over the other and will
            become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we
            separated." --Thomas Jefferson"[3]
     b.)The FIAT un-representative governing empowered by across the board
           "absolute immunity" for the Article III Judiciary negates the constitutional
            guarantee of "a Republican Form of Government" (Constitution for the
            United States of America, Article IV , Section 4, § 1) as secured by the
            representation of the 7th Amendment's civil jury of one's peers.

2.)    "cruel and unusual punishments"[4]
     a.)  Beyond the "complete lack of jurisdiction" STRESSED in the original
           order at the center of this issue, the Order created an infliction of a "cruel
           and unusual punishments" for an ex parte order of protection[5] i.e., a
           misdemeanor traffic violation as probable cause for an ex parte order of
           protection is "cruel and unusual" to say the least.

3.)    "involuntary servitude"[6]
     a.)  In that petition was without reason or warrant, petitioner was FORCED
           into "involuntary servitude" to sustain his parental rights to see his son.



_____--___________________________________________________________
Respectfully submitted, Monday , October 06, 2014
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.  




                                                        
David G. Jeep
GENERAL DELIVERY
Saint Louis, MO  63155-9999
(314) 514-5228
First-Class Mail®       Certified Mail™ Label Number: 7014-1820-0001-8019-5041

Scott S. Harris, Clerk of the Court
Supreme Court of the United States
One First Street N.E.
Washington, DC 20543-0001

Re: A Petition for Rehearing - Petition for Writ of Certiorari 14-5551 David Jeep v. Government of United States EMPHASIS "a Republican Form of Government," [7] "cruel and unusual punishments"[8] and "involuntary servitude"[9] that "a four-year-old[10]" could understand

Dear Mr. Harris,

I stress, as always, "Time is of the essence."  I am impoverished and have been homeless for 6.92 years in this 11.40 year effort.[11] 
"How did strict scrutiny for inalienable "reckonable" rights ever result in anything less than STRICT LIABILITY?"
"The germ of destruction of our nation is in the power of the judiciary, an irresponsible body - working like gravity by night and day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing it's noiseless step like a thief over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall render powerless the checks of one branch over the other and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated." --Thomas Jefferson [12]
If there is anything further I can do for you in this regard, please let me know.
Thank you in advance.
"Time is of the essence"
 David G. Jeep

enclosure
a.     "A Petition for Rehearing - Petition for Writ of Certiorari 14-1470 David Jeep v. Government of United States" dated Tuesday, Monday , October 06, 2014

cc:  Donald B. Verrilli Jr. Solicitor General
       My Blog - Monday , October 06, 2014

First-Class Mail® 

Donald B. Verrilli Jr. Solicitor General
United States Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20530-0001

(202) 514-2217


Re:      "A Petition for Rehearing - Petition for Writ of Certiorari 14-1470 David Jeep v. Govern-ment of United States"

Dear Mr. Verrilli,

I stress, as always, "Time is of the essence."  I am impoverished and have been homeless for 6.92 years in this 11.40 year effort.[13]

Please accept the transmission of the above referenced petition.

If there is anything further I can do for you in this regard, please let me know.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing and enclosed is true and correct.  

Thank you in advance.
"Time is of the essence"




David G. Jeep

enclosure
a.     "A Petition for Rehearing - Petition for Writ of Certiorari 14-1470 David Jeep v. Government of United States" dated Monday , October 06, 2014

cc:  My BlogMonday , October 06, 2014



[2] Constitution for the United States of America, Article IV , Section 4, § 1
[3] As quoted into the Congressional Record Senate Vol. 152, Pt. 1 page 80-81, Mr. Santorum and Bergh, 15:331. 1821
[4] The Bill of Rights, Passed by Congress March 4, 1789, Ratified December 15, 1791, specifically : AMENDMENT VIII
[5] Missouri Revised Statutes Chapter 455 Abuse--Adults and Children--Shelters and Protective Orders  Section 455.050  August 28, 2013
[6] AMENDMENT XIII Passed by Congress January 31, 1865. Ratified December 6, 1865.
[7] Constitution for the United States of America, Article IV , Section 4, § 1
[8] The Bill of Rights, ratified December 15, 1791, specifically : AMENDMENT VIII
[9] AMENDMENT XIII  Passed by Congress January 31, 1865. Ratified December 6, 1865.
[10] Attorney Joe Miller (Denzel Washington REPEATED ASSERTION in "Philadelphia"): Now, explain it to me like I'm a four-year-old.
[11] As of Monday October 06 2014 01:25 PM
[12] As quoted into the Congressional Record Senate Vol. 152, Pt. 1 page 80-81, Mr. Santorum and Bergh, 15:331. 1821.
[13] As of Monday October 06 2014 01:25 PM








--
Thanks in advance,
To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process
"Agere sequitur esse"
"Time is  of the essence"
David G. Jeep
http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/
My E-mail addresses are David.G.Jeep@GMail.com orDGJeep01@yahoo.com

(314) 514-5228

David G. Jeep
GENERAL DELIVERY
Saint Louis , MO 63155-9999

Denial of Petition 14-5551




Friday, September 5, 2014

You are both suppose to be somewhat versed in constitutional law. That being said neither of you seem to have the faintest idea of a constitution’s raison d'être. Petition for Writ of Certiorari 14-5551[1]


President Barack Hussein Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20500-0001

Chief Justice John G. Roberts
Supreme Court of the United States
One First Street N.E.    
Washington, DC 20543-0001


Dear Gentlemen,

You are both suppose to be somewhat versed in constitutional law.  That being said neither of you seem to have the faintest idea of a constitution's raison d'être.

The Constitution for the United States of America was irrefutably written to give We the People recourse, a cause of action, against the government whenever and wherever an individual's reckonable "rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws" were deprived by the government.  This is clearly demonstrated by Chief Justice John Marshal quoting Blackstone in Marbury v Madison, "it is a general and indisputable rule[2] that where there is a legal right, there is also a legal remedy by suit or action at law whenever that right is invaded."[3]
 Yet, neither of you will enforce the
Constitution's raison d'être.
 ABOVE AND BEYOND THAT, Mr. President you will not enforce[4] the constitutionally authorized ex industria criminal law, We the People lawfully enacted post civil war, the Civil rights Act of 1866.[5]  Mr. Chief Justice you will not enforce[6] the constitutionally authorized ex industria civil law, We the People lawfully enacted post civil war, the Civil rights Act of 1871.[7]  

You both support and assert the American coveted status of victimhood.  The American coveted status of victimhood was spawned by the corrupt, self-serving Unconstitutional Article III Judiciary.  As we all know, the judiciary corruptly asserts they would be unable to function, OVERWHELMED by "continual calumnious"[8] or "vexatious"[9] actions, if they were not afforded absolute immunity.  That assertion is based on the premise that "equal protection" of Due Process of law is not possible.  Thus the Constitution for the United States of America is without validity or enforceability.  This absolute immunity empowers absolute power to the ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION[10] of individual reckonable inalienable rights.

That is the MODERN American definition of victimhood.  Without extraordinary measure for XYZ they cannot SURVIVE.  XYZ needs protection above and beyond that of normal persons or they will never survive.

This creates a multi-tier system of justice which is diametrically incompatible with the 14th Amendment's REQUIREMENT of "equal protection of the laws."  Nonetheless it is unconstitutionally sustained and enforced by our constitutional guardians, the Article III Judiciary, for their and their chosen few self-serving benefit to the detriment of the overwhelming majority of We the People.

One need only look at the Jane Crow sexual and Post Jim Crow racial discrimination e.g.:

With the coveted status of victimhood in the Jane Crow era, "It doesn't take a cynic to point out that when a woman (with the coveted status of victimhood) is getting a divorce, what she may truly fear is not violence, but losing the house or kids. Under an ex parte order of protection, if she's willing to fib to the judge and say she is "in fear" of her children's father, she will get custody and money and probably the house."[11]
and
With the coveted status of victimhood in the Post Jim Crow era, we have the criminal profiteering, looting and rioting in Ferguson Missouri over a blatantly false assertion of a civil rights violation, as the result of Michael Brown's strong armed robbery, jaywalking and assault on a police officer with SHOTS FIRED.[12]

I feel it appropriate to quote from Lord Coke, "invigilandum est semper, multae insidiae sunt bonis" (Ed.: one must always be on one's guard, for in good things there are many snares) there is a difference from being on one's guard and turning the blind eye of "absolute immunity."  We the People hoped to "establish justice" with our constitution, not blindly sustain and promulgate "malice and corruption" of "absolute immunity's" ABSOLUTE POWER.[13] 

On another note - How can a Petition be "DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 29, 2014," that is not on the schedule?  There is NO CONFERENCE SCHEDULED for September 29, 2014.

If there is anything further I can do for you in this regard, please let me know.

Thank you in advance.
"Time is of the essence"
  
David G. Jeep

cc:  My Blog - Friday, September 05, 2014, 3:36:32 PM



[1] See also United States Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals Case #07-2614, 08-1823, 10-1947, 11-2425, 12-2435, 13-2200 and 14-1470…Docketed and denied Petitions for Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115, 11-8211, 13-5193 & 13-7030
[2] Absolute Immunity DEFEATS that without due process of law!!!!!!!!!!
[4] You try negotiating for your life, liberty, property or your children in the "Jane Crow" / "Plea Bargain" / "Post Jim Crow era" overseen by an "absolutely immune" sincerely ignorant, conscientiously stupid,  "malicious or corrupt judge" (Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967)) with an "absolutely immune" "malicious or dishonest" prosecutor (Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 409 (1976)), the "absolutely immune" "knowingly false testimony by police officers," (Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983)) or malicious, corrupt, dishonest, sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid actions of "all persons (including spouses) -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process" (Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983)).  This creates ABSOLUTE POWER to the ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION of inalienable rights!!!!
We the People of the United States of America have NO enforceable Civil Rights!!!!!
[5] U.S. Code as 18 USC §241 - §242[5] Criminal Deprivation of rights under color of law
[6] To hear the Supreme Court tell us, via their unrestricted absolutely immune power, We the People, all evidence to the contrary, traded the "King can do no WRONG" for the ABSOLUTELY IMMUNE actions of the "malicious or corrupt" judges(Bradley v. Fisher, supra, 80 U. S. 335, 80 U. S. 349, note, at 80 U. S. 350, Pierson v. Ray, 386 U. S. 57 (1967) Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978)),[6] the "malicious or dishonest" prosecutor Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976), [6] the "knowingly false testimony by police officers" (Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983)),[6] corrupt, malicious, dishonest, sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid[6] actions[6] of federal, state, local, and regional legislators (Bogan v. Scott-Harris - 523 U.S. 44 (1997) Tenney v. Brandhove, 341 U. S. 367, 372, 372-376; Amy v. Supervisors, 11 Wall. 136, 138)[6] and the malicious, corrupt, dishonest, sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid[6] actions of "all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who (spouses) were integral parts of the judicial process" (Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983)) [6] acting under color of law to render ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION[6] of inalienable rights under color of law.
[7] 42 USC §1983 - §1985[7] Civil action for deprivation of rights
[8] Floyd and Barker (1607) Easter Term, 5 James I In the Court of Star Chamber. "For they are only to make an account to God and the King, and not to answer to any suggestion in the Star Chamber; for this would tend to the scandall and subversion of all Justice. And those who are the most sincere, would not be free from continual Calumniations, for which reason the Orator said well, invigilandum est semper, multae insidiae sunt bonis.( Ed.: one must always be on one's guard, for in good things there are many snares.)"
[9] Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 354 (1871) "The exemption of judges of the superior courts of record from liability to civil suit for their judicial acts existing when there is jurisdiction of the subject matter, though irregularity and error attend the exercise of the jurisdiction, the exemption cannot be affected by any consideration of the motives with which the acts are done. The allegation of malicious or corrupt motives could always be made, and if the motives could be inquired into judges would be subjected to the same vexatious litigation upon such allegations, whether the motives had or had not any real existence. Against the consequences of their erroneous or irregular action, from whatever motives proceeding, the law has provided for private parties numerous remedies, and to those remedies they must, in such cases, resort. But for malice or corruption in their action whilst exercising their judicial functions within the general scope of their jurisdiction, the judges of these courts can only be reached by public prosecution in the form of impeachment, or in such other form as may be specially prescribed.
[10] "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority, still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it." Lord Acton in a letter he wrote to scholar and ecclesiastic Mandell Creighton, dated April 1887.
[11]  "The Booming Domestic Violence Industry" - Massachusetts News, 08/02/99, By John Maguire, Hitting below the belt Monday, 10/25/99 12:00 ET, By Cathy Young, Salon - Divorced men claim discrimination by state courts, 09/07/99, By Erica Noonan, Associated Press, Dads to Sue for Discrimination, 08/24/99, By Amy Sinatra, ABCNEWS.com, The Federal Scheme to Destroy Father-Child Relationships, by Jake Morphonios, 02/13/08.
[12] See my blog for more specific information on Michael Brown/Ferguson Missouri
  [13] "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" Lord Acton 1887.



--
Thanks in advance,
To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process
"Agere sequitur esse"
"Time is  of the essence"
David G. Jeep
http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/
My E-mail addresses are David.G.Jeep@GMail.com orDGJeep01@yahoo.com

(314) 514-5228

David G. Jeep
GENERAL DELIVERY
Saint Louis , MO 63155-9999