Tuesday, November 15, 2011

I was quite amazed by your noticeable ignorance and indignation in the recent oral arguments, Smith v. Cain, No. 10-8145.[2]

John G. Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Elena Kagan, Anthony Kennedy, Sonia Sotomayor, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, & Stephen Breyer
The Supreme Court of the United States
Washington, DC     20543-0001

Re: Your noticeable ignorance and indignation
       4:11-cv-0931-cas, USCA8 No. 11-2425[1]

Dear Justices,
     I was quite amazed by your noticeable ignorance and indignation in the recent oral arguments, Smith v. Cain, No. 10-8145.[2]  I say look at the evil you have created!  You seemed upset with your psychological victim's smugness and lack of empathy, Donna R. Andrieu, assistant district attorney in New Orleans.  She was just performing as instructed by the evil intellectually slovenly slothful insanity and dearth of sensitivity of your OWN prior precedents:
     "This immunity applies even when the judge (or all persons integral in the judicial process) is accused of acting maliciously and corruptly."[3]
     "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."[4] 
     "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 (any or all persons integral in the judicial process) police officers."[5]  YA THINK?
     In short the Supreme Court precedent requires absolute INSENSITIVITY and SMUGNESS across the board i.e., "absolute immunity… for all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were (malicious, corrupt, dishonest, incompetent[6] or gave "knowingly false testimony" as) integral parts of the judicial process"[7] for the "deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America"[8]
     "This provision of the law (absolute immunity) is not for the protection or benefit of a malicious or corrupt judge,[9] but for the benefit of ("We the People" being robbed and disenfranchised) the public, whose interest it is that the judges should be at liberty to (act without regard to "We the People" rights, privileges or immunities as secured by the constitution and laws of the United States of America) exercise their functions with independence, and without fear of consequences" [10](non-italic, parenthetical text and emphasis added for CLARITY).
Thomas Jefferson said it better than I could hope to "We have long enough suffered under the base prostitution of law to party passions 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."[11] 
     Your blanket precedent clearly asserts she nor anyone acting in your name under color of law can be held accountable for a wrong to wit, she nor anyone integral in the judicial process can do anything WRONG?
     I agree Donna R. Andrieu, assistant district attorney in New Orleans seemed quite callous and without feeling.  BUT, she was just acting as you and your Black Robed Royalist Brethren have asserted via prior precedent… as if SHE CAN DO NO WRONG!!!!!!!!!! 
     How are your psychological victims Judges, Prosecutors, Police officers and all persons integral parts of the judicial process suppose to psychologically defend themselves for their malice, corruption, dishonesty, incompetence[12] or "knowingly false testimony" without the emotional self-defense of SMUGNESS?  Injustice is ANTI-social by definition. 
     I had a chance recently to re-read Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905) and I have to believe Justice Holmes statement that "[t]he Fourteenth Amendment does not enact Mr. Herbert Spencer's Social Statics" was pertinent here though not for the same reason.  Mr. Herbert Spencer[13] was origin of the phrase "survival of the fittest,"  Our constitution was written and our country is currently inhabited by civilized people.  I do not think I would be overstepping to say this is not a dog eat dog country, We the People are by nature civilized under the rule of law as defined by our intent to establish Justice.
     The current Supreme Court's unmitigated support for the "survival of the fittest" in the application of justice is antithetical to Justice.  James Madison said it best:
     "Justice is the end of government. It is the end of civil society. It ever has been and ever will be pursued until it be obtained, or until liberty be lost in the pursuit. In a society under the forms of which the stronger faction can readily unite and oppress the weaker, anarchy may as truly be said to reign as in a state of nature, where the weaker individual is not secured against the violence of the stronger; and as, in the latter state, even the stronger individuals are prompted, by the uncertainty of their condition, to submit to a government which may protect the weak as well as themselves; so, in the former state, will the more powerful factions or parties be gradually induced, by a like motive, to wish for a government which will protect all parties, the weaker as well as the more powerful."[14]
I am a victim from the other side; I have had my son, my home, my career, my virtual life taken via the DENIAL of JUSTICE.  I cry myself to sleep at night in hopes for a better day tomorrow.  I have tried to assuage my loss because the Supreme Court Precedent says it is unavoidable!!!  I just can't swallow the LIE!!!!  I try to tell myself I need to just get over it for the Supreme Court is clearly divine[15] and can not afford to allow themselves or their henchmen to be bothered by asserted vexatious actions[16] or "continual Calumniations"[17] that rights, privileges or immunities as secured by the constitution and laws of the United States of America[18] allegedly necessitate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And then I say STOP!!!
Let's rethink this
     We the People's Rights, privileges or immunities as secured by the constitution and laws of the United States of America are not vexatious actions[19] or "continual Calumniations;"[20] they are what We the People call the Justice Department's JOB!!!!!!!!!!
     Suck it up, take responsibly for yours and past Supreme Court FIVE'S[21] incompetent, corrupt, malicious, dishonest and intellectually slovenly sloth.[22]  See to JUSTICE in 4:11-cv-0931-cas, USCA8 No. 11-2425[23] and all OTHER cases where IMMUNITY has been allowed to be asserted to the determent of innocent victims!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
     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"

David G. Jeep

cc:  Donna R. Andrieu, assistant district attorney
       Orleans Parish District Attorney's office
       619 South White Street
       New Orleans, Louisiana    70119
       (504) 822-2414

       My Blog - Tuesday, November 15, 2011, 4:09:30 PM

[1] See also USCA8 #07-2614, #08-1823, #10-1947 and Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court #07-11115
[2] "Justices Rebuke a New Orleans Prosecutor" New York Times, November 8, 2011, By ADAM LIPTAK
[3] 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) Judicial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY
[4] Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976) Prosecutorial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY
[6] Incompetence is the most insidious of evils; it is covered up by the grant of malice, corruption and dishonesty!!!!
[7] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 339 (1983) ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for all persons
[9] It should be noted that it protects the "malicious or corrupt judge" i.e., "Absolute Immunity" for all persons that were integral in the Judicial Process"
[11] The Letters of Thomas Jefferson: 1743-1826 SCHOOLS AND "LITTLE REPUBLICS" To John Tyler Monticello, May 26, 1810
[12] Incompetence is the most insidious and unavoidable of human evils; it is denied and covered up by the grant of malice, corruption and dishonesty!!!!
[13] Herbert Spencer (27 April 1820 – 8 December 1903) was an English philosopher, biologist, sociologist, and prominent classical liberal political theorist of the Victorian era.
Spencer developed an all-embracing conception of evolution as the progressive development of the physical world, biological organisms, the human mind, and human culture and societies. He was "an enthusiastic exponent of evolution" and even "wrote about evolution before Darwin did."
Spencer is best known for coining the concept "survival of the fittest", which he did in Principles of Biology (1864), after reading Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species.
[14] FEDERALIST No. 51, The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances Between the Different Departments For the Independent Journal.  Wednesday, February 6, 1788. by James Madison
[15] This in spite of 100 years of Jim Crow Lynching that can be directly linked to the segregationist's ruling in the Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3 (1883) and the conceited ignorance of Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905) that empowered the animalistic SURVIVAL of the FITTEST, "Mr. Herbert Spencer's Social Statics," over the majority of We the People as expressed by our STATUTE LAW
[22] You say you do not want to open up We the People to the liability for We the People's RIGHTS.  THAT ain't your ISSUE.  The regulation of expenditures is NOT your job!!!!  That is done via LAW, "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law"!!!!!  No matter what you think you do not make LAW. 
This expenditure is and has, since constitutional ratification, been lawfully and constitutionally authorized by We the People via the 1st Amendment "A lawfully un-abridge-able right to a justifiable redress of grievances and the 7th Amendment  "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, than according to the rules of the common law."  Your, the Black Robed Royalist Brethren's, corrupt interpretation of the Constitution has created the insanity and insensitivity of YOUR current slovenly, slothfully and indefensible assertion of ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY!!!!!
[23] See also USCA8 #07-2614, #08-1823, #10-1947 and Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court #07-11115

Thanks in advance

To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process
"agere sequitor esse"
"Time is of the essence"
David G. Jeep
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
Post a Comment