Second Motion for Removal of Commissioner Jones

Friday, July 23, 2004

St. Louis County Circuit Court Division 34
Honorable Joseph A. Goeke, III
Associate Circuit Judge
Courts Building, 2nd Floor
7900 Carondelet
Clayton, MO 63105
http://www.co.st-louis.mo.us/circuitcourt/division34.html

Tele: 314-615-1534
Fax: 314-615-2689

Re: Case No.: 03FC-12243, Division No. 65
Petition for removal of Commissioner Jones
And a request for a stay of pending orders enclosed

Dear Judge Goeke,

I am begging judge, literally, and unabashedly on my knees begging judge. I am begging on behalf of my son and myself.

I am seeking relief from a broken system, ripe with abuse. The existing Adult Abuse Protection order puts in force what I believe to be criminal punishment for what, again, I believe to be a civil matter. There is a completely different level of proof required for a civil penalty vs. a criminal penalty. And the accumulation of and access to evidence is different. But yet adult abuse is handled by a family/civil court and it follows that family/civil court is not qualified to dole out criminal punishment.

An Ex Parte order of protection granted to a petitioner gives enormous power to the petitioner over the respondent’s once inalienable rights in a civil matter without ANY consideration of the respondent’s rights. And in severe cases it might be warranted. But severity is not what motivated the order in question it was, self serving motivations on the petitioner’s part and political correctness and expediency on the part of the court. Standards of due process have been ignored via the misuse of the Protection Order in this civil matter. There was nothing even vaguely related to abuse present in this Civil Matter until the court saw fit to step in with Criminal Penalties in again a CIVIL MATTER. The respondent has been and continues to be abused by criminal penalties and sanctions in this civil matter.

I am again asking for relief from the abusive prejudicial and I think vindictive treatment of Commissioner Jones furthermore I ask the Commisiioner Jones be removed from the case. Please review the enclosed orders. I am being asked to pay $12,000 to my opposing/wife’s attorney so that he can pursue the destruction of my reputation by making public private information outside his reasonable knowledge or normal reach. Not that I have access to $12,000 until such time as the court forces liquidation of marital assets. The only reason he has any access at all to this information is because of the unfounded Order of Protection. The unfounded criminal penalty attached to the order of protection gave the petitioner unfettered unreasonable access to what was then and I still believe to be personal information relating to a civil matter. I believe there is some sort of under the table agreement to somehow expedite Commissioner Jones’s docket and attempt to sweep me under the rug.

The petitioner’s only allegation of abuse arises form an alleged incident outside the scope of the Ex Parte petition, a single incident of squeezing or pulling the petitioner’s elbow too tightly. Hospitalization was not called for or was bruising proven.

I am acting ProSe, I am a man of modest means, and to be blunt the Commissioner can not deal with me ProSe that for whatever reason. I am acting ProSe, because my original attorney did not address issues I had put in front of him and/or to act on my direction appropriately. I was thus forced to take matters into my own hands. And additionally I am being forced into acting ProSe because of my wife’s control of the family’s savings. She has already paid her attorney nearly $10,000 and thus depleted all of it on her pursuit of this unfound action without my consent or approval.

This whole issue originated from an exparte order of protection where the commissioner allowed testimony outside the scope of the original petition, over a timely objection. He made a ruling without a finding of fact or a definitive supporting opinion. He has since refused the respondent’s right to be heard on the issue and has consistently ruled against the respondent without reason or again definitive rational on all issues.

I am not an attorney I am just a man and I as read our constitution I should have inalienable rights. Yet my rights to my possessions, my family, my life, my pursuit of happiness have been withheld from me without access to constitutionally afforded due process. It is as if we no longer live with access to due process, we live in a police state and any judge can rule in support of an exparte order of protection. It is fashionable to defend the weak against the abusers, allege a person to be an abuser and he becomes one albeit an allegation of abuse without cause, without findings, outside the scope of the petition, outside the scope of the law and without foundation in fact. Then under current practice to potentially destroy a life at whim with either malice of forethought or as in this case I believe to be criminal negligence. And then if the would be judge/commissioner is too proud to admit he made a mistake and hides behind expediency as an excuse, he can ruin other lives, children and loved ones and again I think these actions by a sitting would be judge/commissioner to be criminally negligent.

I submit that in this case the Order of Protection has been abused and the rights of the respondent have been denied without reason and or Due Process. Due Process as guaranteed by our founding fathers in our constitution precludes this sort of behind closed doors, unassailable, unfounded COURT/ State Action.

All I am asking for is the right in open court to reasonably confront and defend myself against previously asserted openly unsupported accusations in front of a jury of my peers and or another judge. I was in the past literally blindsided by accusations made the morning of the hearing. By right of due process no one should be asked to defend themselves, in today’s emotional charged, politically corrected environment, against spur of the moment unfounded un-foretold politically and fashionably inflammatory accusations / charges.

Time is of the essences.
Respectfully



David G. Jeep

enclosure

cc: Supreme Court of Missouri, http://www.courts.mo.gov/sup/index.nsf
James Robinson, Attorney for the Petitioner
David Shaller, GAL
Philip E. Jones, Division 65
Cynthia Kluzak, St. Louis Family Court