Monday, November 3, 2003

The Evidence Petition for an Ex-parte Order of Protection



The Evidence

Re: The “Jane Crow” [1] era, Jeep v. United States of America[2]

    1.       As I referenced previously with my appeals, my petition for a writ of certiorari and in my prior correspondents with you and because I know you never took the time to look at them, I NOW include for the record:
    2.       A copy of the petition for an order of protection filed 11/03/03.  It does not list any “probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation[3]” i.e., “first hand abuse”.  What it lists is an inadmissible hear-say allegation of a bad-act regarding a court appearance from a month prior and 150 miles away, where the alleged victim, by her own admission, was NOT EVEN PRESENT and where the judge eventually, all though unknown at the time of the hearing (11/19/03), would recuse himself[4] for his thus admitted bad act.  The Judges Goeke and Jones clearly issued a Warrant without probable cause to take away my son, my home, everything I cared for!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    3.      A copy of the post trial (pages 44-48) motion dated December 5, 2003 that was denied.
    4.       A copy of the Court Order (page 49) ruling against the aforementioned motion dated December 18, 2003
"The Sixth Edition of Black's Law Dictionary states the maxim as follows:  'Ei incumbit probatio, qui dicit, non qui negat; cum per rerum naturam factum negantis probatio nulla sit.... The proof lies upon him who affirms, not upon him who denies; since, by the nature of things, he who denies a fact cannot produce any proof.  Black's Law Dictionary 516 (6th ed. 1990).'"This is old news, but again for the record “The Booming Domestic Violence Industry[5]:
It doesn't take a cynic to point out that when a woman is getting a divorce, what she may truly fear is not violence, but losing the house or kids. Under an Order of Protection (209A[6]), 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…
Long-term emotional damage to children's fathers -- surely not good for children -- often begins with a restraining order… 
A man against whom a frivolous Order of Protection (209A) has been brought starts to lose any power in his divorce proceeding. They do start decompensating[7], and they do start to have emotional issues, and they do start developing post-traumatic stress disorders. They keep replaying in their minds the tape of what happened to them in court. It starts this whole vicious downward cycle. They've been embarrassed and shamed in front of their family and friends, unjustly, and they totally lose any sense of self-control and self-respect... It's difficult for the court to see where that person was prior to the restraining order."” [8]

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”
Dave@DGJeep.com
David G. Jeep









[1] The Court’s bias for a woman’s rights over a man’s rights with unequal protection of the Law, family law.
[2] A Petition for a Writ of Certiorari, Jeep v United States of America “Opposed to Immunity” currently on file in the Supreme Court clerk’s office, 8th District Court of appeals Appeal: 10-1947, U.S. Federal Court Eastern District of Missouri Case No. Case 4:10-CV-101-TCM -- State Court Case No.: 03FC-10670M, Missouri Court of Appeals eastern District ED84021, U.S. District Court Eastern District of Missouri Jeep v. Jones et al, 4:07-cv-01116-CEJ, 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 07-2614, Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115 & State Court Case # CR203-1336M, Missouri Court of Appeals Southern District SD26269, U.S. District Court Western District of Missouri 07-0506-CV-W-SOW Jeep v Bennett, et al, 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 08-1823 (http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/).
[3]. Amendment IV – “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized”, ratified 12/15/1791.
[4] Judge Bennett recused himself; I had filed a grievance with the Commission on Retirement, Removal and Discipline of Judges.  Not that it did any good; the Commission has no authority to do anything to a sitting Judge.  They are window dressing, used to wear a person down into submission.
[5]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
[6] (209A) This quote refers to the statute the result of 1978 Abuse Prevention Act in Massachusetts.  Could be MO.
[7] (in psychology) the failure of a defense mechanism.
[8]  Sheara F. Friend, as quoted in  “The Booming Domestic Violence Industry” - Massachusetts News, 08/02/99, By John Maguire.   That describes my first year under an order of protection perfectly!!!!!!!!!!!