WITHOUT STRICT LIABILITY
is just Sophistry
The flaw in American Justice
Saturday, May 28, 2011, 4:29:47 PM
Thomas Jefferson said it first and possibly best "We have long enough suffered under the base prostitution of the law to party passion 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."
Strict Scrutiny arises in two basic contexts: when a "fundamental" constitutional right is infringed, particularly those listed in the Bill of Rights and those the court has deemed a fundamental right protected by the "liberty" or "due process" clause of the 14th Amendment; or when the government action involves the use of a "suspect classification" such as race or, sometimes, national origin that may render it void under the Equal Protection Clause.
Strict Liability – Liability that does not depend on actual negligence or intent to harm, but that is based on an absolute duty to make something safe. Strict Liability makes a person legally responsible for the damage and loss caused by his or her acts and omissions regardless of culpability. Strict Liability is prominent in tort law (especially product liability), corporations law, and criminal law.
Strict Scrutiny is supposed to assure us Rights. But after Strict Scrutiny as established by Supreme Court Precedent there is no Strict Liability for the "deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America" Why do we worry? Why did we establish "any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America" if no one was to be held liable for them.
Now if you are criminal, the Government is held to Strict Liability via The Exclusionary Rule. The Government is strictly forbidden from using any evidence acquired via the denial of a person's Constitutional Rights. But if you are innocent The Exclusionary Rule is irrelevant and Strict Scrutiny becomes irrelevant SOPHISTRY, no one has any Strict Liability for an innocent person's "rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America." The Government can destroy your life and there is no 7th Amendment protection for RIGHTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Everyone has "Absolute Immunity" for the "deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America."
"We the People" have written a constitution to secure rights, "The Bill of Rights." "We the People" have passed statute law to secure rights Title Criminal 18, U.S.C, § 241 & 242, and Title Civil 42 U.S.C. § 1983 & 1985. "We the People" have signed Treaties that require ourselves and others to secure rights, "The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights" PART II, Article 2, Section 3. (a.), (b.) and (c.) (as adopted by the United Nations on 12/16/66, and signed by the United States on October 5, 1977).
But "We the People" have no SECURITY for RIGHTS. Our Government has no STRICT LIABLILTY for our Rights. Our government can randomly at-will deprive us of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America" and there is not a DAM thing we can do about it.
The ministerial grant of "Absolute Immunity"  is a massive, at the highest levels, ministerial unconstitutional "unlawful Conspiracy" "out of Court" to obfuscate "false and malicious Persecutions." 
Impeach the Supreme Court FIVE
Impeach the Supreme Court FIVE for verifiable NOT "good Behaviour," denying the establishment of justice and abridging a Constitutionally secured and congressionally un-abridge-able right, with their deprivation of substantive justice between the government and the people, CONNICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ET AL. v. THOMPSON (3/29/11)!!!
The Right of Petition is the right to substantive justice between the government and the people. We do not have any individually enforceable rights in this country, "Everybody, BUT the innocent victim, has "ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY"" for the deprivation of "any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America" e.g., To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process, The Exclusionary Rule, Grounds for Impeachment, Jeep v Obama, Jeep v United States of America 10-1947, Jeep v Jones "The most humble Petition for a Wirt of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115."
DGJeep "The Earth and everything that's in it" (www.dgjeep.blogspot.com)
Saturday, May 28, 2011, 4:29:47 PM, Separate and Unequal.doc
cc: My Blog - Saturday, May 28, 2011, 4:29:47 PM
 May 26, 1810 a letter Thomas Jefferson to John Tyler, From "The Thomas Jefferson Papers Series 1, General Correspondence, 1651-1827 (Library of Congress)
 Amendment 7 - 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.
 "The Treaty "The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights" 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
 "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 with a gun." 31 U. WEST L.A. L. REV. ( Summer 2000 ) JOHN E. WOLFGRAM
 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."
 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"
Thanks in advance
To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process
"Agere sequitur esse"
"Time is of the essence"
David G. Jeep
E-mail is preferred Dave@DGJeep.com, DGJeep@DGJeep.com
David G. Jeep
c/o The Bridge
1610 Olive Street,
Saint Louis, MO 63103-2316