Redundancies in the Government DOJ, DEA, ATF, FBI, Secret Service (counterfeiting), Local and State
Talk about redundancies DOJ, DEA, ATF, FBI, Secret Service (counterfeiting), Local and State Law enforcement.
Now it is debatable in a free democratic society whether victimless crimes in light of the "harm principle" are even prosecutable. But one thing is for sure with 5 times as many people in prison, more than Stalin and Mao had during their purges, more as a percentage of our population than any other developed country today we definitely do not need the inherent redundancy of 5 federal agencies backed up by State and local governments with the inherent independent overhead for each individual agency!!!!!!!!!!!!
HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
--
Thanks in advance,
"We live in a Lawless Society...
"Agere sequitur 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
Saturday, January 15, 2011
Thursday, January 13, 2011
Jeep v. Obama, et al Everybody, BUT the innocent victim, has “ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY”
President Barack Hussein Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W.
Washington, DC 20500-0001
and
Chief Justice John G. Roberts
Chief Justice John G. Roberts
Supreme Court of the United States
One First Street N.E.
Washington, DC 20543-0001
Re: Jeep v. Obama, et al
Everybody, BUT the innocent victim, has “ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY”
Dear Barack and John,
Jared Lee Loughner had no personal gripe with Congresswoman Giffords. He had no personal relationship with Giffords. He was, I would assert, lashing out at the symbol of what she represented an unreachable, untouchable authority figure. He saw her and us as evil because of the unreachable, untouchable distance. He saw the distance as an impediment to his being heard. I know nothing of his issues; nonetheless I would hold that his assertions were not completely without merit. We are ALL human; we are ALL humanly fallible, WE HAVE TO ADMIT, we are ALL potentially wrong if not evil. He saw us as evil, he wanted to be heard and in our all too insulated society the individual has too much trouble being heard. I quote from his MySpace post on Dec. 14. “why doesn't anyone talk to me?” If you are not in vogue you cannot get heard in America today. Safeway was not his first call for help.
We ALL need to learn to listen better.
I have issues; I have been fighting for 7 years to be heard on a court issue that has credibility. I have REPEATEDLY presented the issue to the courts, Jeep v. United States of America.[1] Jeep v. United States of America is a clear and undisputed denial of rights, but the courts assert “absolute immunity” from any culpability for the “deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.”[2] That is insanity where do I go for redress for the deprivation of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, the Safeway in Tucson?
To be true to our Democratic and equalitarian goals we have to eliminate the barriers between us, domestically and internationally. Everyone has to see him or herself and be seen as equal. We have to RE-establish a belief in our human commonality, the Common Law, a belief that we ARE all equally in this together.
One of those domestic[3] barriers is the Judge made law of “absolute immunity.” Nowhere in our history or in our constitution is “absolute immunity” provided for. Absolute immunity is a throw back to the divine right of Kings. Justice William O. Douglas in his dissent said it best:
“The argument that the actions of public officials must not be subjected to judicial scrutiny because to do so would have an inhibiting effect on their work is but a more sophisticated manner of saying "The King can do no wrong."” Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967)
“Absolute immunity” over powers and works against the fundamental natural constitutional civil rights we profess to believe in. The Courts and probably you, Barack, think someone needs to be in charge, someone needs to have unencumbered freedom to make the decisions. And that is partially true, but those decisions cannot be completely discretionary. They need to be made within the context of our civilization, within the limitations our civilized constitutional perspective; the INDIVIDUAL has rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.
Barrack, I am in essence suing you here as the executive of the United States of America. I hold no animus against you or Mr. Roberts I just want to be heard on my issue a redress for the Deprivation of Rights. If you were in my place would you not be seeking the same thing? Where would you go to the courts? You are BIG name, you are in vogue, you would likely be heard. People like Jared Lee Loughner are not so lucky. They don’t have the patience, the vision or the clerical skill that we do. Do they have to go to the Safeway in Tucson? I have been to the courts. “There remains to him but the alternative of resistance, which may amount to crime.”[4] Where do you go, what do you do when Everybody, BUT the innocent victim, has “ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY????”
Thank you in advance.
“Time is of the essence”
David G. Jeep
cc: a select group of e-mail favorites
file
enclosure
Everybody, BUT the innocent victim, has “ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY”
Everybody, BUT the innocent victim, has
“ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY” [5]
I, like most sane people, condemn the recent shootings in Tucson, Arizona. The Washington Post’s Karen Tumulty, I think reasonably, asks, “What will change as a result of Tucson tragedy? Experience suggests, not much.”[6] I have a different perspective than most; maybe I can offer a suggestion as to what should change. I can, to some extent, understand the shooter. Point in fact I have been arrested[7] for utilizing my Free Speech and talking about this understanding.[8] In my perspective, there is cause for violence in America today and there will be more bloodshed unless we work toward a more CIVILIZED society. Terrorism, Violence and Deprivation of Rights are weapons used by our court system promiscuously without regard and without accountability by way of “absolute immunity” in America TODAY.
I believe in civilization. I condemn the Tucson shootings because I believe in tolerance, I believe in peace; I believe in Justice; I believe in the Rule of Law, but I cannot do it alone.
The American Court system, as ruled by the Supreme Court, does not support Justice and the Rule of Law. Justice and the Rule of Law are now secondary to the rule of anarchy / monarchy by the grant of “absolute immunity… for all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process”[9] for the “deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.”[10] “Absolute immunity” for all is a prescription for ANARCHY; no one is responsible for his or her actions. No one can be held accountable. ANARCHY and Destruction are the unavoidable result!!!!
The anarchy of “absolute immunity” raises its ugly head in society at large. Our trendsetters and cult heroes today operate with the “absolute immunity” of fame. Their every move is revered, mimic and adored. American Society puts too much emphasis on the media darlings of the moment and holds too little value for the enduring standards of the past. We allow our children, without the wisdom of our past experience, to put the trendsetters up on pedestals and worship them as if they were GODS. They are not GODS; they are not super human, THEY ARE NOTHING more than human just like ALL the REST OF US. We need to normalize our perceptions of these people and bring our children’s perceptions of them back down to terra firma. They are ALL human; they all have their human foibles, their human appetites and their human fallibility. A bad thought or word from them or someone else in the in-crowd is not a death sentence. We need to RE-establish a belief in our commonality, the common law of humanity. We all share the same origin, the same fundamental human desires we need to believe in each other’s validity as equals, without the too overpowering whims of transient popular trends or the unreasonable assertion of “absolute immunity.”
The Rule of Law, Fundamental Civil Constitutional Rights are damned in today’s American Court System and Society. In the courts this is a massive criminal conspiracy against rights. It is just a matter of time. I am not some crazy spewing swill about some personal issue. I have been fighting this blatant denial of rights for 7 years.
There is no such thing as strict scrutiny for fundamental constitutional human rights in American Courts today much less strict liability. If you are not rich, cool or an acknowledged minority you can be denied fundamental constitutional human rights by all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process”[11]. There is NO accountability for Fundamental Civil Constitutional Rights. I say again, per the Supreme Court’s rule, there is “absolute immunity… for all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process”[12] therefore all persons have “absolute immunity” for the “deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.”[13] Unavoidable human error, be it malicious, corrupt or negligent is all covered-up by the blanket of “absolute immunity.” It is as if we have somehow regressed to the Dark Ages. We are being forced to accept rule of the King without complaint or redress.[14]
The Court System pays lip service to rights and excuses this malice corruption and negligence, for what they call the greater good, the euphemistic assertion of their “honorable work.” They assert that these illegal, unconstitutional, and destructive actions were “in the heat of battle” that “the violations were not deliberate” “not malicious evil wrongdoing.”[15] The perpetrators are excused because of their “honorable work.” Their victims are left to deal with the loss of life, liberty or property. To make our public servants accountable for “rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws”[16] is toooo much to ask, per the Supreme Court of the United States of America.
Civilization is by definition an agreement between unrelated persons to acknowledge and protect each other’s fundamental rights, for the greater good. The first such agreements were between persons in a cave and allowed for the cohabitation of caves e.g., it was agreed between cavepersons that to allow for each other to sleep soundly through the night, the greater good, there would need to be a law, no attacking while someone was asleep in the cave. To make the agreement workable all parties to the agreement were given equal protection of the laws. To allow “absolute immunity” from the deprivation of rights negates the essence of Civilization, “the protection of the laws.”[17] No one can sleep soundly in his or her cave.
Today in American Courts we do not have EQUAL PROTECTION of DUE PROCESS of the LAWS as we have been taught, as we all assume. Most of us just have not been randomly selected for the deprivation yet. We do not have protection of the Bill of Rights, all we have is lip service. The Supreme Court has said “All persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process” have “absolute immunity”; they are excused for the “deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.”[18] They do not even have to acknowledge their illegal, unconstitutional, corrupt, malicious or negligent actions they have “absolute immunity.” And no one else within the self-serving self-sustaining criminal conspiracy against rights will pursue their co-conspirators’ illegal, unconstitutional, criminal, corrupt, malicious or negligent actions. It is a MASSIVE self-serving, self-sustaining conspiracy against rights, they ALL have “absolute immunity.” The USA Today found in their research for the “Federal prosecutors series,” “"The Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) is a black hole. Stuff goes in, nothing comes out," said Jim Lavine, the president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.”[19]
The victims of the deprivation of rights are left to dangle in the wind, damaged and desperate, without access to Constitutional Law,[20] Statute Law[21] or Common Law.[22] Equal Protection and Due Process of Law are overwhelmed by the all POWERFUL Supreme Court’s grant of “absolute immunity” to all.
When true criminals rights have been disregarded, the Supreme Court has granted “absolute immunity” for criminals. Criminals can use the exclusionary rule[23]to exclude incriminating evidence acquired via the deprivation of rights. But for the innocent person whose rights have been deprived by the officers of the government professing to act in its name there is no redress. “There remains to him but the alternative of resistance, which may amount to crime.”[24]
The shootings in Tucson, while tragic, reassert the undefeatable human condition. There are no absolutes. NO ONE IS 100% SAFE, No one has absolute immunity. The only way to even approach 100% SAFE is to work toward Justice, the Rule of Law, and defend the RIGHTS of EVERY PERSON EQUALLY. If we do not do that, they can and will come at us in the night while we sleep, the cave, the law, society’s norms offers us no protection.
The Tucson shooter has been described as a “nihilistic 'paranoid outcast'”. We have to admit it; WE failed him. He felt alone in a crowded room, he most likely had no concept of what normal was, he could not sense the equal protection of the laws. He seems to have seen everyone as a threat. He was at WAR with everyone. There was no place he felt safe. He felt trapped in a corner. We as a country and a society have to admit that we created him. He may have been to some extent an aberration but he was a product of our CIVILIZATION, as clearly as our racist, our neo-Nazis, our reactionaries, our Democrats, our Republicans, our wheat, our Chevrolets and our apple pie.
I have experienced the isolation; the deprivation of rights can create. I have always valued life, believed in my son and thought myself to be a loyal American. I have always believed in peace, believed in the Rule of Law, believed in our Constitutional Rights, believed in the Equal Protection of the Laws. Yet I have to admit I have contemplated violence in the extreme.
BUT, my country has abandoned me. I do not have the protection of the laws. I have been forced out, isolated. I am alone. I am homeless. I have been backed into a corner. I was held to answer on TWO infamous charges without probable cause, much less proof of any wrongdoing. It was and continues to be a criminal denial of rights.[25] I was and have been objecting, appealing and pointing out this criminal deprivation virtually every second since. The courts refuse to listen; they all have self-proclaimed immunity, the massive criminal conspiracy against rights is all-powerful. “There remains to him but the alternative of resistance, which may amount to crime.”[26] Is the anarchy, the violence of Tucson, Virginia Tech, Kirkwood City Hall all we have left? Is there no defeating the criminal conspiracy against rights, “absolute immunity”?
They took my son, my home, my EVERYTHING. Because of absolute immunity I have NO REDRESS to the protection of the laws.[27] I have endured over 7 years of criminal denial, 411 days of illegal incarceration[28], two psychological examinations, and over three years of abject poverty, homelessness and life on the street in my struggle, Jeep v. United States of America.[29] Am I the crazy one?? I am the one that stood up to the CRIMINAL, the UNCONSTITUTIONAL, the CORRUPT, the MALICIOUS and the NEGLIGENT. The COURT RECORD confirms the criminality, the corruption, the malice and the negligence of the depraved deliberate indifferent criminal conspiracy against rights.[30]
What we need to do is RE-establish a solemn respect for Fundamental Constitutional Civil Rights in our Court system and work to re-establish tolerance and solemn respect for Fundamental Constitutional Civil Rights in our society for all persons equally. We need to make all persons feel secure in their own space, in public, in their caves, in our country and in our society.
“In every country, we should be teaching our children the scientific method and the reasons for a Bill of Rights. With it comes a certain decency, humility and community spirit. In the demon-haunted world that we inhabit by virtue of being human, this may be all that stands between us and the enveloping darkness.” Carl Sagan
Everybody, BUT the innocent victim, has
“ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY”
DGJeep "The Earth and everything that's in it" (http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/)
[1] Petition for a Writ of Certiorari, Jeep v United States of America “Opposed to Immunity” currently on file in the Supreme Court clerk’s office, 8th District Court of appeals Appeal: 10-1947, U.S. Federal Court Eastern District of Missouri Case No. Case 4:10-CV-101-TCM -- State Court Case No.: 03FC-10670M, Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District ED84021, U.S. District Court Eastern District of Missouri Jeep v. Jones et al, 4:07-cv-01116-CEJ, 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 07-2614, Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115 & State Court Case # CR203-1336M, Missouri Court of Appeals Southern District SD26269, U.S. District Court Western District of Missouri 07-0506-CV-W-SOW Jeep v Bennett, et al, 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 08-1823 (http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/).
[3] Internationally we should be holding George W. Bush accountable for his false assertion of WMDs.
[5] Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 13 Wall. 335 (1871)(origination), Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967) (Judges), Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1976) (prosecutors) and Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) (all persons)
[6] Washington Post’s Karen Tumulty ONLINE Monday, January 10, 2011,
[8] The Kirkwood City Council shooting occurred on February 7, 2008, in Kirkwood, Missouri, United States; a suburb of St. Louis, Missouri in St. Louis County. A gunman went on a shooting rampage at a public meeting in the city hall, leaving six people dead and two others injured. Charles Lee "Cookie" Thornton shot one police officer with a revolver across the side street from city hall and took the officer's handgun before entering city hall. “Why did Cookie snap?”
[14] Justice William O. Douglas’s in his dissent from Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967):
“The argument that the actions of public officials must not be subjected to judicial scrutiny because to do so would have an inhibiting effect[17] on their work is but a more sophisticated manner of saying "The King can do no wrong." Chief Justice Cockburn long ago disposed of the argument that liability would deter judges:
"I cannot believe that judges . . . would fail to discharge their duty faithfully and fearlessly according to their oaths and consciences . . . from any fear of exposing themselves to actions at law. I am persuaded that the number of such actions would be infinitely small, and would be easily disposed of. While, on the other hand, I can easily conceive cases in which judicial opportunity might be so perverted and abused for the purpose of injustice as that, on sound principles, the authors of such wrong ought to be responsible to the parties wronged. Dawkins v. Lord Paulet, L.R. 5 Q.B. 94, 110 (1869) (C.J. Cockburn, dissenting)". (Page 386 U. S. 565-566)
[15]“Bill Weigel, president of the National Organization of Bar Counsel, an association of state disciplinary officials.” As quoted “States can discipline federal prosecutors, rarely do.” USA Today
[17] “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, and he never fails to comply with the judgment of his court.” Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803)
[19] “Federal prosecutors likely to keep jobs after cases collapse” Brad Heath and Kevin McCoy, 12/10/10 USA TODAY
[22] “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, and he never fails to comply with the judgment of his court.” Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803)
[23] The Exclusionary Rule (Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961)) was never the fix it was intended to be. Even less so now (Hudson v. Michigan, 547 U.S. 586, 126 S.Ct. 2159 (June 15, 2006) & Herring v. United States No. 07-513 (January 14, 2009)) than when it was originally created as Judge made law in 1961.
[25] Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law, This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.
[27] Title 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil action for deprivation of rights, Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law, or the 1st Amendment: “Congress shall make no law… prohibiting the right of the people… to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
[29] Petition for a Writ of Certiorari, Jeep v United States of America “Opposed to Immunity” currently on file in the Supreme Court clerk’s office, 8th District Court of appeals Appeal: 10-1947, U.S. Federal Court Eastern District of Missouri Case No. Case 4:10-CV-101-TCM -- State Court Case No.: 03FC-10670M, Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District ED84021, U.S. District Court Eastern District of Missouri Jeep v. Jones et al, 4:07-cv-01116-CEJ, 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 07-2614, Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115 & State Court Case # CR203-1336M, Missouri Court of Appeals Southern District SD26269, U.S. District Court Western District of Missouri 07-0506-CV-W-SOW Jeep v Bennett, et al, 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 08-1823 (http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/).
No. 09-1272 - Kentucky v. King “ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY”
No. 09-1272 - Kentucky v. King
“ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY” [1]
No. 09-1272 Title: Kentucky, Petitioner v. Hollis Deshaun King
The issue in No. 09-1272 is a simple one. Eliminate 'ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY." 'ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY" is a judge made law that has no place in a free society of equal persons. No one can operate in a society of free and equal persons with immunity.
“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, and he never fails to comply with the judgment of his court.” Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803)
The protection of the law in this case, if the police had been wrong in breaking down the door, would have been Mr. King’s 1st Amendment Right:
“Congress shall make no law… prohibiting the right of the people… to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
All cost and damages would have been recoupable from the "Government" authority. And I would think that the police-person’s superior would have, at minimum, made very big Black Mark on the perpetrators, the police-person’s record. And if happened on a regular basis, with the same officer: I would expect he would be fired and prosecuted under Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law[2]
In that the police were wrong in their assertion of who was in the apartment, they were not wrong in regard to what authorized them at the door to forcible enter the apartment.
If while the Police were searching the apartment building hallways they had heard a cry for “HELP.” They would have had neither regret nor issue with breaking down the door. The smell of marijuana outside a Kentucky apartment was legally a cry for help from society; help us enforce our marijuana laws.
[1] Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 13 Wall. 335 (1871)(origination), Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967) (Judges), Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1976) (prosecutors) and Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) (all persons)
[2] This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Everybody, BUT the innocent victim, has “ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY” [1]
Everybody, BUT the innocent victim, has
“ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY” [1]
I, like most sane people, condemn the recent shootings in Tucson, Arizona. The Washington Post’s Karen Tumulty, I think reasonably, asks “What will change as a result of Tucson tragedy? Experience suggests, not much.”[2] I have a different perspective than most; maybe I can offer a suggestion as to what should change. I can, to some extent, understand the shooter. Point in fact I have been arrested[3] for utilizing my Free Speech and talking about this understanding.[4] In my perspective, there is cause for violence in America today and there will be more bloodshed unless we work toward a more CIVILIZED society. Terrorism, Violence and Denial are weapons used by our court system promiscuously without regard and without accountability by way of “absolute immunity” in America TODAY.
I believe in civilization. I condemn the Tucson shootings because I believe in tolerance, I believe in peace; I believe in Justice; I believe in the Rule of Law, but I cannot do it alone.
The American Court system, as ruled by the Supreme Court, does not support Justice and the Rule of Law. Justice and the Rule of Law are now secondary to the rule of anarchy / monarchy by the grant of “absolute immunity… for all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process”[5] for the “deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.”[6] “Absolute immunity” for all is a prescription for ANARCHY; no one is responsible for his or her actions. No one can be held accountable. ANARCHY and Destruction are the unavoidable result!!!!
The anarchy of “absolute immunity” raises its ugly head in society at large. Our trendsetters and cult heroes today operate with the “absolute immunity” of fame. Their every move is revered, mimic and adored. American Society puts too much emphasis on the media darlings of the moment and holds too little value for the enduring standards of the past. We allow our children, without the wisdom of our past experience, to put the trendsetters up on pedestals and worship them as if they were GODS. They are not GODS; they are not super human, THEY ARE NOTHING more than human just like ALL the REST OF US. We need to normalize our perceptions of these people and bring our children’s perceptions of them back down to terra firma. They are ALL human; they all have their human foibles, their human appetites and their human fallibility. A bad thought or word from them or someone else in the in-crowd is not a death sentence. We need to RE-establish a belief in our commonality, the common law of humanity. We all share the same origin, the same fundamental human desires we need to believe in each other’s validity as equals, without the too overpowering whims of transient popular trends or the unreasonable assertion of “absolute immunity.”
The Rule of Law, Fundamental Civil Constitutional Rights are damned in today’s American Court System and Society. In the courts this is a massive criminal conspiracy against rights. It is just a matter of time. I am not some crazy spewing swill about some personal issue. I have been fighting this blatant denial of rights for 7 years.
There is no such thing as strict scrutiny for fundamental constitutional human rights in American Courts today much less strict liability. If you are not rich, cool or an acknowledged minority you can be denied fundamental constitutional human rights by all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process”[7]. There is NO accountability for Fundamental Civil Constitutional Rights. I say again, per the Supreme Court’s rule, there is “absolute immunity… for all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process”[8] therefore all persons have “absolute immunity” for the “deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.”[9] Unavoidable human error, be it malicious, corrupt or negligent is all covered-up by the blanket of “absolute immunity.” It is as if we have somehow regressed to the Dark Ages. We are being forced to accept rule of the King without complaint or redress.[10]
The Court System pays lip service to rights and excuses this malice corruption and negligence, for what they call the greater good, the euphemistic assertion of their “honorable work.” They assert that these illegal, unconstitutional, and destructive actions were “in the heat of battle” that “the violations were not deliberate” “not malicious evil wrongdoing.”[11] The perpetrators are excused because of their “honorable work.” Their victims are left to deal with the loss of life, liberty or property. To make our public servants accountable for “rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws”[12] is toooo much to ask, per the Supreme Court of the United States of America.
Civilization is by definition an agreement between unrelated persons to acknowledge and protect each other’s fundamental rights, for the greater good. The first such agreements were between persons in a cave and allowed for the cohabitation of caves e.g., it was agreed between cavepersons that to allow for each other to sleep soundly through the night, the greater good, there would need to be a law, no attacking while someone was asleep in the cave. To make the agreement workable all parties to the agreement were given equal protection of the laws. To allow “absolute immunity” from the deprivation of rights negates the essence of Civilization, “the protection of the laws.”[13] No one can sleep soundly in his or her cave.
Today in American Courts we do not have EQUAL PROTECTION of DUE PROCESS of the LAWS as we have been taught, as we all assume. Most of us just have not been randomly selected for the deprivation yet. We do not have protection of the Bill of Rights, all we have is lip service. The Supreme Court has said “All persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process” have “absolute immunity”; they are excused for the “deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.”[14] They do not even have to acknowledge their illegal, unconstitutional, corrupt, malicious or negligent actions they have “absolute immunity.” And no one else within the self-serving self-sustaining criminal conspiracy against rights will pursue their co-conspirators’ illegal, unconstitutional, criminal, corrupt, malicious or negligent actions. It is a MASSIVE self-serving, self-sustaining conspiracy against rights, they ALL have “absolute immunity.” The USA Today found in their research for the “Federal prosecutors series,” “"The Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) is a black hole. Stuff goes in, nothing comes out," said Jim Lavine, the president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.”[15]
The victims of the deprivation of rights are left to dangle in the wind, damaged and desperate, without access to Constitutional Law,[16] Statute Law[17] or Common Law.[18] Equal Protection and Due Process of Law are overwhelmed by the all POWERFUL Supreme Court’s grant of “absolute immunity” to all.
When true criminals rights have been disregarded, the Supreme Court has granted “absolute immunity” for criminals. Criminals can use the exclusionary rule[19]to exclude incriminating evidence acquired via the deprivation of rights. But for the innocent person whose rights have been deprived by the officers of the government professing to act in its name there is no redress. “There remains to him but the alternative of resistance, which may amount to crime.”[20]
The shootings in Tucson, while tragic, reassert the undefeatable human condition. There are no absolutes. NO ONE IS 100% SAFE, No one has absolute immunity. The only way to even approach 100% SAFE is to work toward Justice, the Rule of Law, and defend the RIGHTS of EVERY PERSON EQUALLY. If we do not do that, they can and will come at us in the night while we sleep, the cave, the law, society’s norms offers us no protection.
The Tucson shooter has been described as a “nihilistic 'paranoid outcast'”. We have to admit it; WE failed him. He felt alone in a crowded room, he most likely had no concept of what normal was, he could not sense the equal protection of the laws. He seems to have seen everyone as a threat. He was at WAR with everyone. There was no place he felt safe. He felt trapped in a corner. We as a country and a society have to admit that we created him. He may have been to some extent an aberration but he was a product of our CIVILIZATION, as clearly as our racist, our neo-Nazis, our reactionaries, our Democrats, our Republicans, our wheat, our Chevrolets and our apple pie.
I have experienced the isolation; the deprivation of rights can create. I have always valued life, believed in my son and thought myself to be a loyal American. I have always believed in peace, believed in the Rule of Law, believed in our Constitutional Rights, believed in the Equal Protection of the Laws. Yet I have to admit I have contemplated violence in the extreme.
BUT, my country has abandoned me. I do not have the protection of the laws. I have been forced out, isolated. I am alone. I am homeless. I have been backed into a corner. I was held to answer on TWO infamous charges without probable cause, much less proof of any wrongdoing. It was and continues to be a criminal denial of rights.[21] I was and have been objecting, appealing and pointing out this criminal deprivation virtually every second since. The courts refuse to listen; they all have self-proclaimed immunity, the massive criminal conspiracy against rights is all-powerful. “There remains to him but the alternative of resistance, which may amount to crime.”[22] Is the anarchy, the violence of Tucson, Virginia Tech, Kirkwood City Hall all we have left? Is there no defeating the criminal conspiracy against rights, “absolute immunity”?
They took my son, my home, my EVERYTHING. Because of absolute immunity I have NO REDRESS to the protection of the laws.[23] I have endured over 7 years of criminal denial, 411 days of illegal incarceration[24], two psychological examinations, and over three years of abject poverty, homelessness and life on the street in my struggle, Jeep v. United States of America.[25] Am I the crazy one?? I am the one that stood up to the CRIMINAL, the UNCONSTITUTIONAL, the CORRUPT, the MALICIOUS and the NEGLIGENT. The COURT RECORD confirms the criminality, the corruption, the malice and the negligence of the depraved deliberate indifferent criminal conspiracy against rights.[26]
What we need to do is RE-establish a solemn respect for Fundamental Constitutional Civil Rights in our Court system and work to re-establish tolerance and solemn respect for Fundamental Constitutional Civil Rights in our society for all persons equally. We need to make all persons feel secure in their own space, in public, in their caves, in our country and in our society.
“In every country, we should be teaching our children the scientific method and the reasons for a Bill of Rights. With it comes a certain decency, humility and community spirit. In the demon-haunted world that we inhabit by virtue of being human, this may be all that stands between us and the enveloping darkness.” Carl Sagan
Everybody, BUT the innocent victim, has
“ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY”
We pay lip service. We say we oppose bullying, we say we stand for equal protection of the law and fundamental constitutional civil rights, we say we believe in our commonality but when push comes to shove we look the other way and allow absolute immunity to those that we KNOW are doing wrong.
DGJeep "The Earth and everything that's in it" (http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/)
[1] Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 13 Wall. 335 (1871)(origination), Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967) (Judges), Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1976) (prosecutors) and Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) (all persons)
[2] Washington Post’s Karen Tumulty ONLINE Monday, January 10, 2011,
[4] The Kirkwood City Council shooting occurred on February 7, 2008, in Kirkwood, Missouri, United States; a suburb of St. Louis, Missouri in St. Louis County. A gunman went on a shooting rampage at a public meeting in the city hall, leaving six people dead and two others injured. Charles Lee "Cookie" Thornton shot one police officer with a revolver across the side street from city hall and took the officer's handgun before entering city hall. “Why did Cookie snap?”
[10] Or will we come to Justice William O. Douglas’s realization in his dissent from Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967)?
“The argument that the actions of public officials must not be subjected to judicial scrutiny because to do so would have an inhibiting effect[17] on their work is but a more sophisticated manner of saying "The King can do no wrong." Chief Justice Cockburn long ago disposed of the argument that liability would deter judges:
"I cannot believe that judges . . . would fail to discharge their duty faithfully and fearlessly according to their oaths and consciences . . . from any fear of exposing themselves to actions at law. I am persuaded that the number of such actions would be infinitely small, and would be easily disposed of. While, on the other hand, I can easily conceive cases in which judicial opportunity might be so perverted and abused for the purpose of injustice as that, on sound principles, the authors of such wrong ought to be responsible to the parties wronged. Dawkins v. Lord Paulet, L.R. 5 Q.B. 94, 110 (1869) (C.J. Cockburn, dissenting)". (Page 386 U. S. 565-566)
[11]“Bill Weigel, president of the National Organization of Bar Counsel, an association of state disciplinary officials.” As quoted “States can discipline federal prosecutors, rarely do.” USA Today
[13] “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, and he never fails to comply with the judgment of his court.” Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803)
[15] “Federal prosecutors likely to keep jobs after cases collapse” Brad Heath and Kevin McCoy, 12/10/10 USA TODAY
[18] “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, and he never fails to comply with the judgment of his court.” Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803)
[19] The Exclusionary Rule (Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961)) was never the fix it was intended to be. Even less so now (Hudson v. Michigan, 547 U.S. 586, 126 S.Ct. 2159 (June 15, 2006) & Herring v. United States No. 07-513 (January 14, 2009)) than when it was originally created as Judge made law in 1961.
[21] Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law, This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.
[23] Title 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil action for deprivation of rights, Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law, or the 1st Amendment: “Congress shall make no law… prohibiting the right of the people… to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
[25] Petition for a Writ of Certiorari, Jeep v United States of America “Opposed to Immunity” currently on file in the Supreme Court clerk’s office, 8th District Court of appeals Appeal: 10-1947, U.S. Federal Court Eastern District of Missouri Case No. Case 4:10-CV-101-TCM -- State Court Case No.: 03FC-10670M, Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District ED84021, U.S. District Court Eastern District of Missouri Jeep v. Jones et al, 4:07-cv-01116-CEJ, 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 07-2614, Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115 & State Court Case # CR203-1336M, Missouri Court of Appeals Southern District SD26269, U.S. District Court Western District of Missouri 07-0506-CV-W-SOW Jeep v Bennett, et al, 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 08-1823 (http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)