Monday, May 16, 2011

Sophistry - Civil Rights, The Jane Crow Era and The Plea Bargain/Exclusionary Rule era

-->
Sophistry run Amuck
Jim Crow Era, The Jane Crow Era and The Plea Bargain/Exclusionary Rule Era
Monday, May 23, 2011, 5:04:59 PM

Thomas Jefferson said it first and possibly best “We have long suffered under the base prostitution of the law to party passion in one judge and the imbecility of another.  In the hands of one the law is nothing more than an ambiguous text, to be explained by his sophistry into any meaning which may subserve his personal malice.[1]”  Thomas Jefferson was referring to the Judiciary’s approval of the Alien and Sedition Acts that had voided freedom of the speech press and assembly (1798-1800), during John Adam’s Presidency.  When Thomas Jefferson became president he pardon all those that had been charged or held under the Alien and Sedition Acts.
One need only look at the Civil Rights Act 1876, “That all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges of inns, public conveyances on land or water, theaters, and other places of public amusement and compare it to Civil Rights Act 1964 We the People again said “All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, and privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation.”  The only substantive difference is the Supreme Court with their Sophistry unrestrained chose to void the Civil Rights Act 1876 and then just as capriciously chose NOT to void the Civil Rights Act 1964We the People saw the problem when we passed the Civil Rights Act 1876.  But We the People could not enact a law that was needed and useful on our own; we had to endure 100 years of the Supreme Courts Sophistry FIRST!!!! If the Supreme Court’s sophistry had not gotten in the way we could have avoided 100 years of Jim Crow Era, racial unrest and persecution. 
An ill-advised reverential consideration of our Judges has to this day, to our own determent, empowered the self-serving royalist judge made law of Judicial Immunity.[2]  Judicial immunity, by way of the ill-defined sophistry trick bag in stare diesis, can literally do anything unchecked.  We the People, have no enforceable rights in Americaall persons that were integral in the Judicial Process[3]” have “Absolute Immunity” for “the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America.[4] Criminals[5] can randomly rob an innocent victim, criminals can randomly kidnap your children, criminals can randomly Murder the innocent victim.  And there is not a DAM thing anyone can do about it.  The Supreme Court requires[6] that the innocent victim, to receive substantive justice for the crimes perpetrated against the innocent victim, must first prove that the criminal, under color of law, has done the same thing to multiple other innocent victims in a timely and consistent pattern of obvious stupidity before he or she can be held accountable for the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America[7] from the innocent victim.
The Jane Crow Era[8], 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 exparte 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.”
fait accompli, "A man against whom a frivolous exparte order of protection has been brought starts to lose any power in his divorce proceeding. They do start decompensating,[9] 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."[10] 
The innocent victim whose children have been kidnapped whose entire life’s possessions have been stolen has no recourse for redress of grievances.  It is the act of a Judge.  Black Robed Judges can do no wrong in the Royalist American version of the justice system.  Just ask the Kings, the Supreme Court[11] of the United States of America"Immunity is given to crime,[12] and the records of the public tribunals are searched in vain for any evidence of effective redress.[13]" "The courts are in many instances under the control of those who are wholly inimical[14] to the impartial administration of law and equity.[15]"
The Plea Bargain/Exclusionary Rule Era, I refuse to believe our Judicial Process is FIVE times better than the rest of the developed world.  With the ubiquitous use of the plea bargain, innocent victims are offered little hope to clear their names against a stacked deck before the evidence is even revealed, “Either you plea out before trial or we go for the MAXIMUM!”  “With 5% of the world's population, our country now houses nearly 25% of the world's reported prisoners. We currently incarcerate 756 inmates per 100,000 residents, a rate nearly five times the average worldwide of 158 for every 100,000.[16]” Our Royalist Judicial Process has been allowed to run amuck unchecked for TOOO long.  We have no IDEA.  It scares me to think how many INNOCENT people may currently be incarcerated that have been denied their constitutional rights.  Rights that would have cleared their name, denied by immune CRIMINAL[17] attorneys persecuting innocent victims, not prosecuting, in our justice system, or wearing badges or the black robes of the royalist judiciary.[18]  I refuse to believe we are 5 times as criminal as any other country.  It scares me to think how many men have been emotionally, financially and physically torn from their own flash and blood in the Jane Crow era.   I REFUSE to believe that our criminal Justice system is 5 times better!!!!  I am FORCED by the PRECEDENT of personal experience to think that 4 out of 5 of the current persons incarcerated in American prisons today as unproductive wards of the state might be completely innocent because they have likely had their Constitutional Rights CRIMINALLY denied under color of law!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
To further their cause of a Royalist Justice system, the Supreme Court has created The Exclusionary Rule to cover up their crimes at the expense of We the People.  The premise of The Exclusionary Rule is the assumption that the Judicial Process[19] can do no wrong.  The Royalist Judicial Process in America would prefer to let known criminals go free rather that accept criminal and civil responsibility for their criminal actions, under color of law.[20]  They set up a royalist system of deterrents that allow criminals acting under color of law to act without personal regard to their actions; We the People are forced to cover up Judicial Process’s criminal actions by accepting the KNOWN criminal back into our midst.  It is INSANITY!!!!   The Exclusionary Rule is compensation to the criminal for “the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America[21]
As verified in Bivens, “Finally, assuming Bivens' innocence of the crime charged, the "exclusionary rule" is simply irrelevant. For people in Bivens' shoes, it is damages or nothing.”[22]
“We the People” have to take back the unchecked power to fabricate self-serving Judge made law out of “sophistry.”  The Judiciary is and has been criminally[23] using their “sophistry” to maliciously corruptly and incompetently deny the establishment of Justice,[24] We the People[25] sought for “ourselves and our Posterity.”
We the People” do not have the substantive right to Justice between the Government and the People that instigated the Declaration of Independence’s repeated petitions for redress.  “We the People” do not have the lawfully un-abridge-able right to petition the government for a redress of grievances secured by the First Amendment. 
We the People” are at the mercy of the judges and “all persons that were integral in the Judicial Process.[26]”  They can deprive “any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America[27] under color of law but outside Due Process of law and there is nothing We the Peoplecan do about it short of Impeachment, Revolution or War. 



Impeach the Supreme Court FIVE[28]

Impeach the Supreme Court FIVE for verifiable NOT “good Behaviour,[29]” denying the establishment of justice and abridging a Constitutionally secured and congressionally un-abridge-able right, with their deprivation of substantive justice between the government and the people, CONNICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ET AL. v. THOMPSON (3/29/11)!!!

The Right of Petition is the right to substantive justice between the government and the people.  We do not have any individually enforceable rights in this country, "Everybody, BUT the innocent victim, has "ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY"" for the deprivation of “any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America[30] e.g., To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process, The Exclusionary Rule, Grounds for Impeachment, Jeep v Obama, Jeep v United States of America 10-1947, Jeep v Jones “The most humble Petition for a Wirt of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115.”

DGJeep "The Earth and everything that's in it" (www.dgjeep.blogspot.com)
Monday, May 23, 2011, 5:04:59 PM, Sophistry Run Amuck.doc


[1] May 26, 1810 a letter Thomas Jefferson to John Tyler, From “The Thomas Jefferson Papers Series 1, General Correspondence, 1651-1827 (Library of Congress)
[2] Bradley v. Fisher, 13 Wall. 335 (1872) @ Page 80 U. S. 349) (origin Judicial “Absolute Immunity), Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 409 (1976) (prosecutorial “Absolute Immunity”), Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978) (Judicial “Absolute Immunity”), Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) (“Absolute Immunity” for all persons that were integral in the Judicial Process)
[3] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) (“Absolute Immunity” for all persons that were integral in the Judicial Process)
[5] TITLE 18—CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PART I—CRIMES, CHAPTER 13—CIVIL RIGHTS § 241. A Conspiracy against rights -- They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
[6] See the recent rulings, CONNICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ET AL. v. THOMPSON (3/29/11), “difficult problems of proof;” I would assert IMPOSSIBLE STANDARDS of proof.
[8] The “Jane Crow” Era started with the over funded witch hunt “The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, 1974 P.L. 93-247 (CAPTA).
[9] In psychology, the term refers to the inability to maintain defense mechanisms in response to stress, resulting in personality disturbance or psychological imbalance.  In times of extreme inescapable stress the psyche shuts down as its only defensive mechanism.
[10]The Booming Domestic Violence Industry” - Massachusetts News, By John Maguire, “Hitting below the belt 08/24/99, By Amy Sinatra, ABCNEWS.com, The Federal Scheme to Destroy Father-Child Relationships, by Jake Morphonios, 02/13/08.
[11] See the recent rulings, CONNICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ET AL. v. THOMPSON (3/29/11), high standards of proof; I would assert IMPOSSIBLE STANDARDS of proof.
[12] TITLE 18—CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PART I—CRIMES, CHAPTER 13—CIVIL RIGHTS § 241. A Conspiracy against rights -- They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping (they kidnapped my son) or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill (they attempted to kill Mr. Thompson), they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
[13]DGJeep 2011, William O. Douglas dissent Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967) @ Page 386 U. S. 559, Cong.Globe, 42d Cong., 1st Sess., 374, Congressman Lowe of Kansas, March 31, 1871
[14] Amendment 1, Congress shall make no law… abridging… the right of the people… to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
[15] DGJeep 2011, William O. Douglas dissent Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967) @ Page 386 U. S. 559, Cong.Globe, 42d Cong., 1st Sess., 394, Congressman Rainey of South Carolina, April 1, 1871
[16] "Why We Must Fix Our Prisons", By Senator Jim Webb, Parade Magazine published: 03/29/2009, U.S. Imprisons One in 100 Adults, Report Finds New York Times, By ADAM LIPTAK, Published: February 29, 2008, Our Real Prison Problem. Why are we so worried about Gitmo? Newsweek by Dahlia Lithwick Published June 5, 2009
[17] TITLE 18—CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PART I—CRIMES, CHAPTER 13—CIVIL RIGHTS § 241. A Conspiracy against rights -- They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping (they kidnapped my son) or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill (they attempted to kill Mr. Thompson), they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
[18] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) "Absolute immunity… for all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process" for the "deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws."
[19] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) (“Absolute Immunity” for all persons that were integral in the Judicial Process)
[20] TITLE 18—CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PART I—CRIMES, CHAPTER 13—CIVIL RIGHTS § 241. A Conspiracy against rights -- They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping (they kidnapped my son) or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill (they attempted to kill Mr. Thompson), they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
[22] Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) @ Page 403 U. S. 410
[23] TITLE 18—CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PART I—CRIMES, CHAPTER 13—CIVIL RIGHTS § 241. A Conspiracy against rights -- They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping (they kidnapped my son) or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill (they attempted to kill Mr. Thompson), they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
[24] Justice is the end of government, it is the civilized society
[25]We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” The Constitution for the United States of America, September 17, 1787 – ratification final – June 21, 1788
[26] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) (“Absolute Immunity” for all persons that were integral in the Judicial Process)
[29] Article III Section 1 the Constitution for the United States of America “The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour”