Saturday, December 4, 2010

Chief United States District Judge Catherine D. Perry, Dereliction of your duty

111 South 10th Street, Suite 14.182
St. Louis, MO 63102-1125

Phone (314)244-7520
Fax (314)244-7529

Re:     I say HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
       Your denial is without compassion, precedent or legal basis

Dear Ms Perry,
I am in receipt of your response to my request for a judicial “inquiry or investigation,” dated 30-Nov-2010.
Unfortunately for me and for YOU, I have to disagree with your assertion “I cannot provide you with the assistance you request.”  I had heard you had a first rate legal mind of a sublime order, I still hope that is true. 
You assert you cannot provide me assistance with an “inquiry or investigation.”  Your assertion that you CANNOT provide me with assistance is without controlling basis with statute or precedent.  Point in fact nothing could be further from the truth.  Now you may not want to provide me with assistance and since you are appointed for life with little or no oversight you may be able to get away with the dereliction of your duty. 
I can do nothing but utilize my FREEDOM of speech and SHOUT about your negligence, your corruption and your unmitigated malice from every rooftop and online outlet I can find.
I am a person, not unlike most persons, who does NOT believe in the ABSOLUTE law of precedent.  Precedent should be used to stabilize the interpretation of the law not inhibit the progress of civilization.  To further explain I quote from Alexander Hamilton in The Federalist No. 78, Saturday, June 14, 1788, “To avoid an arbitrary discretion in the courts, it is indispensable that they should be bound down by strict rules and precedents, which serve to define and point out their duty in every particular case that comes before them.”  But, when it becomes self evident that precedent is wrong, as it has several times in our history, we should never hold the advancement of civilization hostage to the mistakes of the past.  This advancement of civilization has occurred several times and there is PRECEDENT for it.  I site West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish (1937), Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954) and Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963) to name but a few landmark cases that moved precedent forward for the advancement of civilization. 
You assert: “Neither I nor the federal court system can conduct such an inquiry or investigation.”  You and I both know that is WRONG!  You and the federal court system can and SHOULD conduct a judicial “inquiry or investigation.”  It is your duty per your oath of office “to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic[1] I am asking for your defense of my 14th Amendment Right, “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.”  There is specific precedent for a judicial “inquiry or investigation” as noted above for Landmark cases, in the common law dating back 400 (1607) and 225 (1769) years and in current precedent (1932). 
As I sited in my letter dated 17-Nov-10 Lord Coke, Floyd and Barker (1607), calls for “due examination of Causes out of Court, and inquiring by Testimonies, Et similia for this he ought to do” over 400 years ago.  Specifically in Gideon (1963), as noted above, the petitioner presented a hand written unperfected appeal to the courts and they made an “inquiry or investigation” of his expressed requests and ruled in his favor.  He was eventually exonerated on all issues. 
The current precedent, more specifically regarding an “inquiry or investigation,” I sited Sterling v. Constantin, 287 U.S. 378 (1932) Page 287 U. S. 397-398 in my second letter[2] begging for help with a judicial “inquiry or investigation” I quote:
When there is a substantial showing that the exertion of state power has overridden private rights secured by that Constitution, the subject is necessarily one for judicial inquiry in an appropriate proceeding directed against the individuals charged with the transgression. To such a case the federal judicial power extends (Article III, § 2), and, so extending, the Court has all the authority appropriate to its exercise.”
With my first request, letter dated 17-Nov-10 I provided evidence of a “substantial showing that the exertion of state power has overridden private rights secured by that Constitution.  This evidence is now online for all to see.[3] Additionally I quote common law from 1765-1769 and The Federalist No. 84:
The observations of the judicious Blackstone, in reference to the latter, are well worthy of recital: "To bereave a man of life, [says he] or by violence to confiscate his estate, without accusation or trial, would be so gross and notorious an act of despotism, as must at once convey the alarm of tyranny throughout the whole nation; but confinement of the person, by secretly hurrying him to jail, where his sufferings are unknown or forgotten, is a less public, a less striking, and therefore a more dangerous engine of arbitrary government."
It is obvious from the evidence presented, and now ONLINE, I was bereaved of my son, my settled life, and my home (estate) without probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation[4] or “Due Process of LAW.”  It was a “gross and notorious an act of despotism, as must at once convey the alarm of tyranny throughout the whole nation.”   I was denied my constitutionally guaranteed civil rights to say the LEAST.  Clearly I was held to answer an INFAMOUS[5] deficient charge, it lacked probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation.” And I repeat to again STRESS the INFAMOUS[6] charge’s absurd unrelated listed “acts” were also INFAMOUS[7] from ANOTHER JURISDICTION i.e., a different geographic and subject matter jurisdiction.  Thus, at the illegal and unconstitutional hearing, I was asked to respond to TWO infamous accusations without any credible probable cause or presentment.[8]” I clearly was DENIED “Due Process of Law.”  Because of my poverty and your resistance my sufferings to date are unknown or forgotten, a less public, a less striking, and therefore a more dangerous engine of arbitrary government.
            There is nothing to the “inquiry or investigation;” I have presented the undisputed and undeniable evidence of the crimes.  You need only review the online documentation and confirm the undisputed facts presented with the complete record.  I am not disputing the facts of the Complete Record; I dispute only the negligent, corrupt and malicious results.  I can with your support provide further substation for a redress of grievances.  The COMPLETE RECORD when examined, without the assertion of absolute immunity for the judges, the prosecutors, the police and the falsely alleged victim, supports my petition to the Government for a redress of grievances.[9]
            These negligent, corrupt and malicious actions of the transgressors have left me nothing but the will that says HOLD ON!!!!!!!!!!  I have done nothing wrong.  No one has ever credibly even accused me of wrongdoing.  I have been charged, convicted and punished for infamous unfounded accusations alone without access to the MINIMUM standards of Due Process of Law, competence and verity. 
The 14th Amendment clearly empowers and REQUIRES the Federal Courts to enforce rights, “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” I am destitute; I have nothing left to fund an “inquiry or investigation.”  I live on the street and in homeless shelters.  I am literally and figuratively on my last leg.  I have endured 7 years of criminal denial, 411 days of illegal incarceration[10], two psychological examinations, and three years of abject poverty, homelessness and life on the street in my struggle, Jeep v. United States of America[11]
If there is anything further I can do for you in this regard, please let me know.
“Time is of the essence”
Thank you in advance.

David G. Jeep


cc:  file

[2] “This is Corrutption on a massive scale” dated 23-NOV-1
[4] Amendment IV, The right of the people to be secure… no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation…” ratified December 15, 1791
[5] Amendment V, “No person shall be held to answer for a(n) infamous crime, unless on a presentment… nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…” ratified December 15, 1791
[6] Amendment V ratified December 15, 1791
[7] Amendment V ratified December 15, 1791
[8] Amendment V, Due Process of Law as defined by Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), says: “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.Page 373 U. S. 87.  Without specific PROBABLE CAUSE related to the charge of “abuse” I could not defend my self.  It was like shooting fish in barrel.  The RECORD supports this!!!!!!!!!!!!
[9] 1st Amendment, “The Bill of Rights” ratified December 15, 1791
[11] 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 (