“Let them Eat Cake”
There is NO Justice in America
Sunday, August 14, 2011, 3:54:43 PM
With the Constitution for the United States of America
We the People only think We have “rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America United States of America
"This immunity applies even when the judge is accused of acting maliciously and corruptly" 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). “To be sure, this immunity does leave the genuinely wronged defendant without civil redress against a prosecutor whose malicious or dishonest action deprives him of liberty" Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976). “There is, of course, the possibility that, despite the truthfinding safeguards of the judicial process, some defendants might indeed be unjustly convicted on the basis of knowingly false testimony by police officers" Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983).
Now the Supreme Court loves to assert “truthfinding safeguards” and “the law has provided for private parties numerous remedies.”[2] With nearly 8 years of committed effort, I dispute those assertions. Now if the victim could just get the issue in court that might be possible. BUT the ministerial grant of “Absolute Immunity” [3] is a massive, at the highest levels, ministerial, unconstitutional and “unlawful Conspiracy”[4] “before out of Court”[5] to obfuscate “false and malicious Persecutions.” [6] You can not even get the issue into court. And if you could summon the euber-emphatic requirements of impeachment or criminal prosecution, the victim still is left without redress of grievances. The innocent victim is, again, left on the side of the road for dead.
I mean why did We the People even go to the effort to write a constitution, a Bill of Rights if it was assumed that the Judges would NOT be bound by the Supreme Law of the Land and the Bill of Rights.
There has to be liability, there has to accountability, there has to be “reckonabilty;”[7] immunity invalidates all. The Supreme Court has forgotten its PRIMARY task, to establish Justice. As an innocent victim on the side of the road clinging to life by a thread all I hear is the Supreme Court and it sounds like Marie Antoinette asserting,
“Let them Eat Cake”
But there is no cake, there is no justice as there was NO BREAD; there are NO “truthfinding safeguards”[8] and the law has NOT “provided for private parties numerous remedies.”[9] EVERYBODY, but the innocent victim, has immunity to act with impunity.
“Immunity is given to crime, and the records of the public tribunals are searched in vain for any evidence of effective redress.” “The courts are in many instances under the control of those who are wholly inimical to the impartial administration of law and equity.” I say it NOW, 2011!!! Justice William O. Douglas said it in 1961 and 1967. [10] Mr. Lowe of Kansas and Mr. Rainey of South Carolina
for condoning the denial of a Constitutionally secured and congressionally un-abridge-able right to justice and
"fraud upon the court."
Impeach the Supreme Court FIVE for verifiable NOT "good Behaviour,[13]" denying the establishment of justice and abridging a Constitutionally secured and congressionally un-abridge-able right, with their deprivation of substantive 7th Amendment[14] justice between the government and the people, Connick, District Attorney, et al. v. Thompson No. 09–571 Decided March 29, 2011 and "fraud upon the court" with Ashcroft v. al-Kidd No. 10–98 Decided May 31, 2011!!!
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” 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)
Sunday, August 14, 2011, 3:54:43 PM, 2011 08-14-11 Let them Eat Cake REV 02.doc
[1] “Predictability or as Llewellynn puts it, “reckonabilty” is a needful characteristic of any law worthy of the name.” Antonin Scalia, “The Rule of Law as the Law of Rule” The University of Chicago
[2] “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.” Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U. S. 354 (1871)
[3] “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.” Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) @ Page 460 U. S. 335
[4] Lord Coke Floyd and Barker (1607) “Judge or Justice of Peace: and the Law will not admit any proof against this vehement and violent presumption of Law, that a Justice sworn to do Justice will do injustice; but if he hath conspired before out of Court, this is extrajudicial; but due examination of Causes out of Court, and inquiring by Testimonies, Et similia, is not any Conspiracy, for this he ought to do; but subornation of Witnesses, and false and malicious Persecutions, out of Court, to such whom he knowes will be Indictors, to find any guilty, &c. amounts to an unlawful Conspiracy.”
[7] Immunity of any kind denies the “Predictability or as Llewellynn puts it, “reckonabilty” is a needful characteristic of any law worthy of the name.” Antonin Scalia, “The Rule of Law as the Law of Rule” The University of Chicago
[9] “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.” Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U. S. 354 (1871)
[11] Cong.Globe, 42d Cong., 1st Sess., 374 & 394
[12] Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, and Chief Justice John G. Roberts
[13] Article III Section 1 the Constitution for the United States of America
[14] Amendment VII In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States
--
Thanks in advance
To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process
"agere sequitor esse"
"Time is of the essence"
David G. Jeep
http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/
E-mail is preferred Dave@DGJeep.com, DGJeep@DGJeep.com
(314) 514-5228
David G. Jeep
c/o The Bridge
1610 Olive Street,
Saint Louis, MO 63103-2316
No comments:
Post a Comment