"My son set himself on fire for dignity"[1]
The Protester
Time's Man of the Year 2011
"A country in which nobody is ever really responsible is
Monday, December 19, 2011, 4:09:41 PM
"We the People" think it could NEVER happen here, "We the People" think we are civilized, "We the People" think we have the dignity of secured Civil Rights, "We the People" think we have a judicial system that defends an individuals dignity and civil rights.
"We the People" are truly clueless as to our own JUDICIAL SYSTEM. "We the People" have no enforceable rights; "We the People" have no enforceable dignity. "We the People" wrote it into our constitution, but "We the People" in the United States of America today do not have access to dignity to enforce "We the People's" constitutionally secured civil rights, Justice.
TODAY Justice cannot be established in the United States of America! As proof - "With 5% of the world's population, our country now houses nearly 25% of the world's reported prisoners."[5] There are those that want to attempt to explain it away with the issue of our Drug Laws, yet every developed country in the world has been forced via trade agreements with the United States of America to enact the same DRUG LAWS. The Difference is the black Robed Royalist Supreme Court Five[6] have ministerially[7] awarded themselves and others absolute immunity[8] from the "deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America"[9] i.e., a blanket grant of Absolute Immunity to "malicious or corrupt" judges,[10] malicious corrupt or incompetent judicially ordered forced sterilization,[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.
I am truly surprised people are not dropping like flies from self immolation, as a Werther effect, in the face of the undefeatable malicious, corrupt, dishonest and incompetent[16] judicial system in the United States of America. "We the People" have been duped by the Royalist Black Robed Guild of Judges.
Why would "We the People" even write a constitution if "We the People" were not intent upon holding each other and our government to it with strict scrutiny and strict liability for its violation?[17] Why did "We the People" even write the Constitution for the United States of America as SUPREME LAW if it was our intent to allow the Judiciary to hand out absolute immunity[18] like Halloween candy for the "deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America."[19]
The current and prior black Robed Royalist Supreme Court Five[20] have clandestinely and ministerially[21] awarded themselves and others absolute immunity[22] for the "deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America"[23] i.e., a blanket grant of Absolute Immunity to "malicious or corrupt" judges,[24] malicious corrupt or incompetent judicially ordered sterilization,[25] the "malicious or dishonest" prosecutor, [26] the "knowingly false testimony by police officers"[27] and "all (malicious, corrupt, dishonest and incompetent[28]) persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process" [29] acting under color of law.
This is a massive conspiracy at the highest levels of our government of the people, by the people and supposedly for the People.
It use to be that "To bereave a man of life, says he or by violence to confiscate his estate, without Due Process of Law would be so gross and notorious an act of despotism, as must at once convey the alarm of tyranny throughout the whole nation!!!!!!!!!!!![30]"
Things are NOT as they were. In the 18th Century during revolutionary times American JOURNALISM was courageous. They fought and died for the freedom of the press. Things are NOT as they were; revolutionary American JOURNALISM would never have stood still for "so gross and notorious an act of despotism, as must at once convey the alarm of tyranny throughout the whole nation" as they do today.
Men are bereaved of their children, their life, their liberty, and their property (see Mr. Thompson (No. 09–571),[31] Mr. Smith (No. 10-8145), [32] Mr. al-Kidd (No. 10–98), [33] Ms. Millender (No. 10-704),[34] and myself (USCA8 No. 11-2425),[35]), without DUE PROCESS of LAW, all the time in the courthouses of America. "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.[36]" There are those that want to attempt to explain it away with the issue of our Drug Laws, yet every developed country in the world has been forced via trade agreements with the United States of America to enact the same DRUG LAWS.
It is considered tooo inexpedient[39] to give an innocent person unconstitutionally, illegally and wrongfully convicted of an infamous crime any hope of petitioning "the Government for a redress of grievances." Expediency is not an acceptable excuse when it comes to Justice, law and equity. If you give in to expediency in such an issue you will expediently condemn yourself. Who ever said the right way had to be the easy way, the expedient way. Why would "We the People" even take the time to write a Constitution for the United States of America as absolute law if it was not "We the People's" intent to the have "any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America absolutely assured as far as possible?
The incorporated acts of the government, its Judiciary and "all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process"[40] are considered "of so high a nature, that for their sublimity they import verity in themselves; and none shall be received to aver any thing against the record."[41] Everyone has immunity from civil and criminal liability -- everyone but the innocent victim of the corruption, malice and incompetence. I have to question that?
ANY assertion of personal ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY, without proof of divinity, is a fraud, by any standard of Justice, law and equity,[42] 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!!!!!
"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. [48] Mr. Lowe of Kansas and Mr. Rainey of South Carolina respectively said it originally in 1871[49].
Impeach the current Black Robed Royalist Supreme Court FIVE[50]
for condoning the denial of a Constitutionally secured and congressionally un-abridge-able right to justice[51] 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,[52]" denying the establishment of justice and abridging a Constitutionally secured and congressionally un-abridge-able right, with their deprivation of substantive 7th Amendment[53] 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"[54]" for the "deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America"[55] e.g., "To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process,"[56] "The Exclusionary Rule," "Grounds for Impeachment."
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."
I have referenced "To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process," in several of my papers, I do so only because the facts of the case in "To Kill a Mocking Bird" are generally known. The abuses are happening EVERYDAY in REAL LIFE Mr. Thompson (No. 09–571),[57] Mr. Smith (No. 10-8145), [58] Mr. al-Kidd (No. 10–98)[59] and myself (USCA8 No. 11-2425).[60] The fact that "With 5% of the world's population, our country now houses nearly 25% of the world's reported prisoners"[61] PROVES IT !!!!!!!!!!!!
DGJeep "The Earth and everything that's in it" (www.dgjeep.blogspot.com)
Monday, December 19, 2011, 4:09:41 PM, 0000 Blank Issue Paper REV 00.doc
[1] "Mohamed suffered a lot. He worked hard. But when he set fire to himself, it wasn't about his scales being confiscated. It was about his dignity." —Mannoubia Bouazizi, Tunisia (Mother of the Tunisisa 26-year-old street vendor named Mohamed Bouazizi
[2] "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.
[3] "Damages" By Dahlia Lithwick, Slate, posted Monday, Aug. 8, 2011, at 7:22 PM ET underlining and foot note added
[4] 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
[5] "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
[7] 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.
[8] "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
[10] 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.
[11] IN 1978 Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978) Forced Sterilization, In 1971, Judge Harold D. Stump granted a mother's petition to have a tubal ligation performed on her 15-year-old daughter (Sparkman), whom the mother alleged was "somewhat retarded." The petition was granted the same day that it was filed. The judge did not hold a hearing to receive evidence or appoint a lawyer to protect the daughter's interests. The daughter underwent the surgery a week later, having been told that she was to have her appendix removed. The daughter Sparkman sued.
[12] Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976) Prosecutorial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY
[13] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983) Police 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] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the grant of malice, corruption and dishonesty!!!!
[17] Constitutionally secured First Amendment lawfully un-abridge-able right: "Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." The 7th Amendment's secures the right to settle all disputes/suits equitably: "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." Supreme Court stare decisis "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." "It is a settled and invariable principle in the law… that every right, when withheld, must have a remedy, and every injury its proper redress." Chief Justice John Marshal in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 163 (1803) establishing Supreme Court precedent and quoting English common law per the Commentaries on the Laws of England (1644) by Sir William Blackstone. "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
As precedent I quote The Declaration of Independence: "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." Obviously The Colonist were not content to just be filing petitions they were looking for more - SUBSTANTIVE JUSTICE – for the denial of rights between themselves and the government of King George III .
[18] "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
[21] 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.
[22] "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
[24] 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.
[25] IN 1978 Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978) Forced Sterilization, In 1971, Judge Harold D. Stump granted a mother's petition to have a tubal ligation performed on her 15-year-old daughter (Sparkman), whom the mother alleged was "somewhat retarded." The petition was granted the same day that it was filed. The judge did not hold a hearing to receive evidence or appoint a lawyer to protect the daughter's interests. The daughter underwent the surgery a week later, having been told that she was to have her appendix removed. The daughter Sparkman sued.
[26] Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976) Prosecutorial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY
[27] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983) Police ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY
[28] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the grant of malice, corruption and dishonesty!!!!
[29] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983) ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for "all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process"
[30] Blackstone's Commentaries (1765-1769), Vol. 1, p. 136 and The Federalist No. 84 (1788) by Alexander Hamilton
[34] Messerschmidt v. Millender, No. 10-704
[35] See also USCA8 #07-2614, #08-1823, #10-1947 and Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court #07-11115
[36] "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
[37] Judge Learned Hand's apathetic corrupt assertion says it best, "As is so often the case, the answer must be found in a balance between the evils inevitable in either alternative. In this instance it has been thought (by who, the recipients, the mailicous, corrupt and dishonest judges, prosecutors, and police?) in the end better to leave unredressed the wrongs done by dishonest officers than to subject those who try to do their duty to the constant dread of retaliation, (Justice is a constant dread?)." Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U. S. 345 (1983), non italic parenthetical text added. Expediency is not an acceptable excuse when it comes to Justice, right and wrong, if you give in to expediency in such an issue you will expediently condemn yourself. Why would we even take the time to write down as absolute law if it was not intent to the have "any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America"
[39] Judge Learned Hand, Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U. S. 345 (1983) ibid.
[41] Lord Coke Floyd and Barker (1607) This is the conclusion of the precedent with EXCEPTIONS noted. Third logical argument end of the paragraph, the noted EXCEPTION, "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." (emphasis and underlining added)
[42] Justice without regard to equity impoverishes the victim at the expense of the evil they have suffered. I have been forced into homelessness for FOUR YEARS! The 1st Amendment secures the constitutional right to a lawfully un-abridge-able redress of grievance from the government: "Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." The 7th Amendment's secures the right to settle all disputes/suits: "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 justice as regards equity.
[43] 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.
[44] "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
[45] 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."
[48] Monroe v. Pape, 365 U. S. 167 (1961) and Pierson v. Ray, 386 U. S. 559 (1967)
[49] Cong.Globe, 42d Cong., 1st Sess., 374 & 394
[51] The redress of a justifiable grievance REQUIRES a remedy in BOTH law and equity
[52] 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
[53] 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.
[54] "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
[56] Mr. Hoar of Massachusetts stated: "Now, it is an effectual denial by a State of the equal protection of the laws when any class of officers charged under the laws with their administration permanently, and as a rule, refuse to extend that protection. If every sheriff in South Carolina (or now the State of Missouri) refuses to serve a writ for a colored man, and those sheriffs are kept in office year after year by the people of South Carolina (or now the State of Missouri), and no verdict against them for their failure of duty can be obtained before a South Carolina (or now the State of Missouri) jury, the State of South Carolina (or now the State of Missouri), through the class of officers who are its representatives to afford the equal protection of the laws to that class of citizens, has denied that protection. If the jurors of South Carolina (or now the State of Missouri) constantly and as a rule refuse to do justice between man and man where the rights of a particular class of its citizens are concerned, and that State affords by its legislation no remedy, that is as much a denial to that class of citizens of the equal protection of the laws as if the State itself put on its statute book a statute enacting that no verdict should be rendered in the courts of that State in favor of this class of citizens. " Cong.Globe, 42d Cong., 1st Sess. p. 334.( Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167 (1961), Page 365 U. S. 177) Senator Pratt of Indiana spoke of the discrimination against Union sympathizers and Negroes in the actual enforcement of the laws: "Plausibly and sophistically, it is said the laws of North Carolina (or now the State of Missouri) do not discriminate against them; that the provisions in favor of rights and liberties are general; that the courts are open to all; that juries, grand and petit, are commanded to hear and redress without distinction as to color, race, or political sentiment." "But it is a fact, asserted in the report, that of the hundreds of outrages committed upon loyal people through the agency of this Ku Klux organization, not one has been punished. This defect in the administration of the laws does not extend to other cases. Vigorously enough are the laws enforced against Union people. They only fail in efficiency when a man of known Union sentiments, white or black, invokes their aid. Then Justice closes the door of her temples." Cong.Globe, 42d Cong., 1st Sess. p. 505. (Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167 (1961), Page 365 U. S. 178) non italic parenthetical text added fro clarity.
[60] See also USCA8 #07-2614, #08-1823, #10-1947 and Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court #07-11115
[61] "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
--
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