Tuesday, December 6, 2011

I seek JUSTICE, law and equity, with the Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of the United States USCA8 No. 11-2425[1]

Monday, December 05, 2011

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

Re: Where did "We the People" go wrong?
I seek JUSTICE, law and equity, with the Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of the United States USCA8 No. 11-2425[1]

Dear Justices,

Do you have the guts to admit yours and other's mistakes[2] and work for justice, law and equity, unlike your victim[3] Donna R. Andrieu,[4] an assistant district attorney in New Orleans? 
I have to ask…
Where did "We the People" go wrong?
"A country in which nobody is ever really responsible is
a country in which nobody[5] is ever truly safe."[6]
Monday, December 05, 2011, 2:31:24 PM

     Where did "We the People" go wrong?  "We the People" no longer have access to Justice, law and equity,[8] in the United States of America.  "We the People" no longer have protection of the law.  "We the People" no longer have enforceable respected rights.  "False and malicious persecutions"[9] are empowered "before out of court"[10] all over America by a blanket grant of absolute immunity to "malicious or corrupt" judges,[11] the "malicious or dishonest" prosecutor, [12] the "knowingly false testimony by police officers"[13] and all malicious, corrupt, dishonest and incompetent[14] "persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process" [15] acting under color of law. [16]   
     This is diametrically opposed to the first and MOST important right of any person anywhere… the unalienable right to Justice, law and equity.  Our founding fathers had learned, first hand, all rights are based on a foundation of Justice, law and equity.  The raisons d'etre for civilization, and thus for government, is the establishment of Justice, law and equity.  "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."[17]  Justice is diametrically and irreconcilably opposed to the sanctioning of malicious, corrupt, dishonest and incompetent[18] actions. 
     Chief Justice John Marshal in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 163 (1803) quoting English common law per the Commentaries on the Laws of England, the 18th-century treatise on the common law of England by Sir William Blackstone establishing binding Supreme Court precedent, stare decisis, and securing our rights:
"The very essence of civil liberty certainly consists in the right of every individual to claim the protection of the laws whenever he receives an injury. One of the first duties of government is to afford that protection. In Great Britain, the King himself is sued in the respectful form of a petition,[19] and he never fails to comply with the judgment of his court
"it is a general and indisputable rule that where there is a legal right, there is also a legal remedy by suit or action at law whenever that right is invaded"[20]
"I am next to consider such injuries as are cognizable by the Courts of common law. And herein I shall for the present only remark that all possible injuries whatsoever that did not fall within the exclusive cognizance of either the ecclesiastical, military, or maritime tribunals are, for that very reason, within the cognizance of the common law courts of justice, for it is a settled and invariable principle in the laws of England that every right, when withheld, must have a remedy, and every injury its proper redress." [21]"
We the People incorporated ourselves into a government of the people, by the people and FOR the people with the Constitution for the United States of America to establish Justice, law and equity, and take responsibility to secure the Blessings of Liberty, our rights, as the supreme law of the land:
I.) Preamble:
"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."[22]
II.) Article VI. Second paragraph:
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby"[23]
III.) This Constitution Secures us:
A Constitutionally secured lawfully un-abridge-able First Amendment right:

"Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."[24]

I would think that the unjustified "deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws" "under color of law" would in the minds of our founders have been a governmental redress-able grievance.  It is absurd to even consider anything else as redress-able.
IV.) The Laws secure us:
Title 18 Criminal law §242 – Criminal Deprivation of rights under color of law: "Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, 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 and then stole everything) 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[25] and Mr Smith[26]), shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
Title 42 Civil Law §1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights: Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress.
V. All Treaties made – secures us:
"The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights"[27] as adopted by the United Nations on 12/16/66, and signed by the United States on October 5, 1977 secures for third world countries and the United States of America:
PART II, Article 2, Section 3. Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes:
(a)   To ensure that any person whose rights or freedoms as herein recognized are violated[28] shall have an effective remedy, notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity;
(b)   To ensure that any person claiming such a remedy shall have his right thereto determined by competent judicial, administrative or legislative authorities, or by any other competent authority provided for by the legal system of the State, and to develop the possibilities of judicial remedy;
(c)   To ensure that the competent authorities shall enforce such remedies when granted.
Alexander Hamilton said it in June of 1788 at the ratification of the Constitution for the United States of America:
"There is no position which depends on clearer principles, than that every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void… To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid."[29]
Yet "We the People's Judiciary, have ministerially[30] awarded themselves and others absolute immunity[31] from the "deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America"[32] i.e., a blanket grant of Absolute Immunity to "malicious or corrupt" judges,[33] the "malicious or dishonest" prosecutor, [34] the "knowingly false testimony by police officers"[35] and all malicious, corrupt, dishonest and incompetent[36] "persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process" [37] acting under color of law
     How can a judge, a delegated authority, acting under a constitutional commission award themselves absolute immunity from said constitutional commission to "do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid?"
     Rights are NOT "vexatious actions"[38] or "continual Calumniations"[39] they are what "We the People" call the Justice Department's job.  
     In every stage of these Oppressions I have petitioned for redress[40] in the most humble terms: My repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A President, A group of Judges or Judicial Process whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.[41]
     ANY assertion of personal ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY, without proof of divinity, is a fraud, by any standard of Justice, law and equity, in a government of free and equal persons on THIS PLANET!!!!! 
     ANY assertion of governmental ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY, acknowledging un-avoidable human fallibility, is a fraud, by any standard of Justice, law and equity, in a government of the people, by the people and for the people on THIS PLANET!!!!!
     The ministerial[42] grant of "Absolute Immunity,"[43] by and for ministers, is a massive, at the highest levels, ministerial, unconstitutional and "unlawful Conspiracy" [44] "before out of Court"[45] to obfuscate "false and malicious Persecutions."[46]
     "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. [47]  Mr. Lowe of Kansas and Mr. Rainey of South Carolina respectively said it originally in 1871[48]
Impeach the current Black Robed Royalist Supreme Court FIVE[49]
for condoning the denial of a Constitutionally secured and congressionally un-abridge-able right to justice and "fraud upon the court."
Before they have a chance to screw-up Healthcare for 100 years!!!!!!
Impeach the current Supreme Court FIVE for verifiable NOT "good Behaviour,[50]" denying the establishment of justice, law and equity, and abridging a Constitutionally secured and congressionally un-abridge-able right, with their deprivation of substantive 7th Amendment[51] justice, law and equity, 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, law and equity, between the government and the people and it has always been since John Marshal wrote the British common law into Supreme Court stare decisis.[52]  We do not have any individually enforceable rights in this country, "Everybody, BUT the innocent victim, has "ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY"[53]" for the "deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America"[54] e.g., "To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process," "The Exclusionary Rule," "Grounds for Impeachment" (see www.DGJeep.blogspot.com)
     Most of the 99% of Americans have not had the pleasure and are silently intimidated by the prospect of being dragged through our corrupt COURTS kicking and screaming!!!!!!  I have been kicking and screaming for nearly 8 years.  I have suffered through 411 days of illegal incarceration, 4 years of homelessness and two psychological examinations.  I ask you to review Jeep v Obama 8th Circuit Court of Appeals case #11-2425, Jeep v United States of America 10-1947," Jeep v Bennett 08-1823, "Jeep v Jones 07-2614, and the most humble Petition for a Wirt of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115 and The Evidence (all are online at http://www.dgjeep.blogspot.com/).
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:  My Blog - Monday, December 05, 2011


[1] See also USCA8 #07-2614, #08-1823, #10-1947 and Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court #07-11115
[2] 100 years of Jim Crow's lynching, discrimination, INEQUALITY, corruption, malice and incompetence can be directly attributed to the absolute immunity granted with Randall v. Brigham, Page 74 U. S. 536 (1868) and Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 335 (1871).  Lets not install another 100 years of inequality with Jane Crow's (the preference for female rights over male rights in family disputes) version of lynching (the ex-parte order of abuse), discrimination, INEQUALITY, corruption, malice and incompetence
[3] Your victims have been benumbed to Justice in both law and equity by your assertion that they like the "KING CAN DO NO WRONG."  It is important to STRESS LAW and EQUITY.
[4] "Justices Rebuke a New Orleans Prosecutor" New York Times, November 8, 2011, By ADAM LIPTAK
[5] "And if you think that is a national problem, consider that the United States is by far the World's greatest power; it is not accountable to its own people for its abuses of power, and that abuse of power flows freely into international circles. Given that reality, there is not a nation in the world that should not fear us in the same way that a reasonable person fears a child (or a thief) with a gun." 31 U. WEST L.A. L. REV. ( Summer 2000 ) JOHN E. WOLFGRAM e.g., George Bush's false representations of Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq -  Underlining and parenthetical text added for emphasis.
[6] "Damages" By Dahlia Lithwick, Slate, posted Monday, Aug. 8, 2011, at 7:22 PM ET underlining and foot note added
[7] Mr. Thompson in the New York Times in response to the Supreme Court's ruling in Connick, District Attorney, et al. v. Thompson No. 09–571 Decided March 29, 2011
[8] Justice without regard to equity impoverishes the victim at the expense of the evil they have suffered.  The 7th Amendment's reference "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" assures an justice as regards equity.
[9] 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."
[11] 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 is based on a skewed reading, overlooking the noted exception that absolute ANYTHING creates, of Lord Coke, Floyd and Barker (1607) ruling from an acknowledged CORRUPT court, the Star Chamber.
[12] Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976) Prosecutorial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY
[14] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the grant of malice, corruption and dishonesty!!!!
[15] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983) ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for "all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process"
[16] "With 5% of the world's population, our country now houses nearly 25% of the world's reported prisoners" and you have the moronic audacity to ask why???? "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] FEDERALIST No. 51 The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances Between the Different Departments Wednesday, February 6, 1788.  James Madison
[18] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the grant of malice, corruption and dishonesty!!!!
[19] This also secured the right to petition as the right to sue the sovereign into binding United States Supreme Court stare decisis.
[20] Chief Justice John Marshal Quoting Blackstone into Supreme Court stare decisis binding to all that follow (5 U.S. 163).
[21] Chief Justice John Marshal Quoting Blackstone into Supreme Court stare decisis binding to all that follow (5 U.S. 163).
[22] Preamble to the Constitution for the United States of America, the requirement of ratification by nine states, set by Article Seven of the Constitution, was met when New Hampshire voted to ratify, on June 21, 1788.
[23] Article. VI. Constitution for the United States of America.
[24] King George III's denial of the colonist's petitions i.e., "In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people." (The Declaration of Independence: IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776., The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America)  should be considered the precedent and the basis for the First amendments security: "Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."  The Founders did not want to see themselves or their Posterity denied substantive justice AGAIN!!  
[27] "The Covenant is presented for both its binding force as "Supreme Law of the Land", and also for its persuasive force in reason, to help understand the nature of our own Petition Clause, that it is a law of reason freely chosen by our founders: If we now choose it freely as a basis for the organization of free nations, why should we presume that it was less compelling when our Founding Fathers brought the Thirteen Colonies together under one Constitution?" 31 U. WEST L.A. L. REV. ( Summer 2000 ) JOHN E. WOLFGRAM
[28] deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws
[29] The Federalist Papers No. 78, "The Judiciary Department"
[30] Ministerially created rules are SECONDARY, in a Democratic Constitutional form of government, to the will of the people as specifically expressed in the Constitution and the Statute law.  For anyone to ministerially grant immunity from the Constitution and Statute law is to act in direct conflict with the tenor of the commission under which the MINISTERIAL authority was granted.
[31] "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
[33] 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 is based on a skewed reading, overlooking the noted exception that absolute ANYTHING creates, of Lord Coke, Floyd and Barker (1607) ruling from an acknowledged CORRUPT court, the Star Chamber.
[34] Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976) Prosecutorial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY
[36] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the grant of malice, corruption and dishonesty!!!!
[37] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983) ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for "all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process"
[40] See also USCA8 #07-2614, #08-1823, #10-1947, #11-2425  and Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court #07-11115
[41] Adapted from The Declaration of Independence: IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776, The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America
[42] Ministerially created rules are SECONDARY… ibid.
[43] "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
[48] Cong.Globe, 42d Cong., 1st Sess., 374 & 394
[50] 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" Yes it is spelled wrong in the Constitution
[51] 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, than according to the rules of the common law.
[52] "In Great Britain, the King himself is sued in the respectful form of a petition, and he never fails to comply with the judgment of his court." Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803), Page 5 U. S. 163
[53] "absolute immunity… for all persons… " Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) @ Page 460 U. S. 335




--
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