Due Process of Law
is the
Scale of Justice
I sometimes feel like the waif in "The Emperor's New Cloths"
AM I THE ONLY ONE THAT CAN SEE IT??
"A country in which nobody is ever really responsible is
Sunday, June 10, 2012, 10:27:19 AM
Due Process of Law is the
legal requirement that the state must respect all of the legal rights that are
owed to an individual person. Due Process of Law balances the power of the government
against the rights of the individual persons, and vice versa, to the ends of
justice.[4]
The Constitution and Due Process of Law are NOT ambiguous text, to be explained
by sophistry into any meaning which may subserve personal malice." [5]
Due Process of Law equally protects individual persons and the
government from being unjustly beset by the malicious,
corrupt, dishonest and incompetent[6] government or individual person's
actions. Thus Due Process of Law equally
protects We the
People's government/society and the individual person's rights.
When a government harms a person without following the exact[7] course of the ancient and refined Due
Process of the Law, this constitutes a criminal[8] violation of civil rights, which
offends against the rule of law[9] and the ends of justice.[10]
In the United States of America it is and has been since enactment of the right
of redress, the 1st and
7th Amendments,[11] and the end of the Civil War a civilly[12] actionable offense.
Due process of law is an ancient principle. Most scholars
trace the idea of due process of law in the Anglo-American tradition to Chapter
39[13] of the Magna Carta of 1215. King John
promised among other things not to imprison, exile, or destroy any free man or
his property "except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of
the land." The phrase
"by the law of the land" meant that government,
like the governed, must obey the law. The phrase "due
process of law" first appeared in the subsequent 1354 version of the Magna
Carta. Both phrases— "due
process" and "law of the land"—mean that government must follow known and
established procedures and
may not act arbitrarily or unpredictably in negatively altering or destroying
life, liberty, or property.[14]
That being said "absolute immunity," and its
inevitable progeny absolute
power,[15] as awarded by current
UNCONSTITUTIONAL, corrupt and malicious self-serving assertions
of power by the guild of
judges in Supreme Court
precedent is a massive unconstitutional conspiracy against the rights of
persons.
The Court is an unbiased, but methodical "creature"
which is governed by Constitutional Due Process of Law. The Court can
ONLY be effective, fair and "just" if it is allowed to function as Due Process of Law proscribes. "Fraud upon
the court is fraud which is directed to the judicial machinery itself and is
not fraud between the parties or fraudulent documents, false statements or
perjury. ... It is where the court or a member is corrupted or influenced or
influence is attempted or where the
judge has not performed his judicial function --- thus where the impartial functions
of the court have been directly corrupted" (Bulloch v. United States,
763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985)). It
is axiomatic that fraud vitiates everything subsequent to it.
Whenever any officer of the court commits fraud during a
proceeding in the court, he/she is engaged in a crime, "fraud upon the
court." If a Judge (who is NOT the "Court") does NOT
support or uphold Due Process
of Law, it is "fraud upon the court."
In Jeep v the Government of the United States of America, et al
there has been "fraud upon the court" via the assertion of
immunity. It would be as if we were actually still living under the Royal
rule of the King and believed in sovereign immunity. We the People knew better at inception of our
Democratic Constitutional Government. We
the People made "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."[16]
Corrupt ministerial authority, at the highest levels, in our government of the
people, by the people and for the people has sought to install them selves as
sovereign and immune from the "the supreme Law of the Land."
In Jeep v the Government of the United States of America, et al,
Judge Bennett had the plaintiff thrown in jail at a pretrial hearing without
any probable cause and without allowing the plaintiff to be heard on the then
NON-EXISTENCE of probable cause and held over night, it was "fraud upon
the court;" a corruption of Due
Process of Law. Then Judge Coyler, acting in a conspiracy of common
interest, denied pretrial motions for exculpable[17] evidence that would have proven,
pretrial, that Police officer, Alex Little, Officer Badge #920, had tendered a
fraudulent probable cause statement in the original issue (CR203-1336M), it was
"fraud upon the court;" a corruption of the process. Add
to that the second arresting police officer's, Tim Taylor Officer Badge #913,
surprise contradiction of his prior sworn police report on the stand under oath
at trial and if I were on the jury, I would have convicted
MYSELF!!!!!!!!! But at that time I believed as most people should,
witness, especially police officers,[18] do not lie on the stand under
oath. But I was naive.
Add to that the exculpable[19] evidence requested prior was obtained
independently by the plaintiff after the jury trial conviction and yet prior to
sentencing it was "fraud upon the court" for Judge Colyer to
knowingly enter the FALSE conviction into the record and impose a sentence, it
was "fraud upon the court;" a corruption of Due Process of Law. You
then have a conspiracy involving two judges, two police officers, three
district attorneys and the state's attorney general.[20]
The deprivations of the plaintiff's rights
that resulted in corruption of the judicial process, "fraud upon the court"
were ALL over my timely verifiable formal written and oral objections and
motions, pre-trial, at-trial, post-trial and have been nearly constantly
memorialized in the nearly 8 years of subsequent repeated petitions, appeals
and complaints for redress of grievances.
In the second issue in Jeep v. the Government of the United States
of America, et al, Judge Goeke knowingly issued a fraudulent, on the face of
it, court order that lack probable cause. Commissioner Jones then held
the plaintiff to answer the deficient fraudulent court order and allowed the
petitioner to at trial assert probable cause not referenced earlier.
Commissioner Jones then amended the pleading to include the SURPRISE evidence
of a prior unknown bad act, that was then incorporated into a revised
fraudulent surprise court order that was never formalized into written form,
never brought to hearing, just ENFORCED against the plaintiff for twelve plus
months. I quote "The Court finds--First of all, the Court amends
the pleadings to conform with the evidence adduced. The Court does find
the allegations[21] of the amended petition to be true."
The lack of probable cause on the original court order made it a
"fraud upon the court." The lack of probable cause prior to
the hearing, made the hearing a "fraud upon the court."
Amending the charge at the hearing and the creation of a new order that was
never formalized into written form and never brought to a hearing was again
"fraud upon the court" and a corruption of Due Process of Law.
In that Judge Goeke issued the original fraudulent Order at the
behest of the petitioner and Commissioner was acting under the judicial
authority of the 21st District
Court of Missouri en banc and you have a conspiracy that involves a judge, a
petitioner, a commissioner and court house full of judges.[22]
The deprivations of the plaintiff's rights
that resulted in corruption of the judicial process, "fraud upon the court"
were ALL over my attorney's and my timely verifiable formal written and oral
objections and motions, pre-trial,
at-trial, post-trial and have been nearly constantly memorialized in the nearly
8 years of subsequent repeated petitions, appeals and complaints for redress of
grievances.
You add to that after my Writ of Certiorari[23] had been denied, I was arrested and
held 411 days illegally because I sought the FBI's and the USMS's help in
enforcing federal statue law i.e., Title Criminal 18, U.S.C, § 241 &
242, and Title Civil 42 U.S.C. § 1983 &
1985. And then the Federal Court via "fraud upon the court"
asserts ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for all those involved and you have a conspiracy that
now includes the President of the United States and the current sitting Supreme
Court of the United States en banc.
And you wonder why I say our judges are Justice System is out of
control?? All the motions, all the evidence it is on my blog DGJeep "The Earth and
everything that's in it" (www.DGJeep.blogspot.com)
"The Judiciary has been allowed to foist a fantastic or delusional
scenario[24] on We the People i.e., the Judiciary has forced We the People to exchange the immunity of the divine
right of Kings for "absolute immunity from subsequent damages
liability for all (malicious,
corrupt, dishonest and incompetent[25]) persons
-- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process."[26]
This in effect is an exchange for absolute immunity for ONE, the King, to many
all malicious, corrupt, dishonest and incompetent[27]persons. The Judiciary has done
this by allowing its chief circuit judges to dismiss systematically 99.82% of
the complaints filed against judges in the 12-year period, Tuesday October 01,
1996 thru Tuesday September 30, 2008. In that period, its judicial councils
–the circuits all judge disciplinary bodies– denied up to 100% of the petitions
to review those dismissals. Up to 9 of every 10 appeals are
disposed of ad-hoc through no-reason summary orders or opinions so
"perfunctory" that they are neither published nor precedential, mere
fiats of raw judicial power"[28] talk about a "fantastic
or delusional scenario" to
support ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY the self-serving seizure of ABSOLUTE POWER
The issues in this and all prior petitions are of a nature that
any and all sitting members of the judiciary are unavoidably impacted by the
inherent malice, corruption, dishonesty, and incompetence,[29] of the prior unconstitutional and
unsustainable assertion of ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY of our so called Justice system.[30]
How can the Supreme Court, a
delegated authority, acting under a sworn[31] to constitutional commission award themselves and others "absolute
immunity"[32] from
said constitutional commission to "do not only what their powers do
not authorize, but what they forbid"[33] i.e., the "deprivation
of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws
of the United States of America?"[34] by DENYING the constitutional assurance
of governmental accountability with 1st and 7th Amendment Justice, law and equity?[35]
We the People have
fallen under the despotic[36] spell
of the concentrated power[37] in the Supreme Court that has created ABSOLUTE POWER from ABSOLUTE
IMMUNITY for the "malicious
or corrupt" judges,[38] the "malicious or dishonest"
prosecutor, [39] the "knowingly false testimony
by police officers"[40] and "all (malicious, corrupt, dishonest and incompetent[41]) persons
-- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process" [42] acting under color of law to wit, ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION.
I sometimes feel like the waif in "The Emperor's New Cloths." AM I THE ONLY ONE THAT CAN SEE IT??
ANY assertion of personal ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY, without proof of divinity, is a fraud, by any standard of Justice, law and equity,[43] 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. [49] Mr. Lowe of Kansas and Mr. Rainey of South Carolina respectively said it originally in 1871[50].
for condoning the denial of a Constitutionally secured and congressionally un-abridge-able right to justice[53] 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,[54]" denying the establishment of justice and abridging a Constitutionally secured and congressionally un-abridge-able right to a redress of grievances,[55] with their deprivation of substantive 7th Amendment[56] 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"[57]" for the "deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America"[58] e.g., "To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process,"[59] "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),[60] Mr. Smith (No. 10-8145), [61] Mr. al-Kidd (No. 10–98)[62] and myself (USCA8 No. 11-2425).[63] The fact that "With 5% of the world's population, our country now houses nearly 25% of the world's reported prisoners"[64] PROVES "We the People" have NO ENFORCEABLE RIGHTS IN America today!!!!!!!!!!!!
DGJeep "The Earth and everything that's in it" (www.dgjeep.blogspot.com)
Sunday, June 10, 2012, 10:27:19 AM, 0000 Blank Issue Paper REV 00.doc
David G. Jeep
c/o The Bridge, 1610 Olive Street, Saint Louis, MO 63103-2316
E-Mail Dave@DGJeep.com (preferred) www.DGJeep.blogspot.com
(314) 514-5228
[1] "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 e.g., George Bush's false representations of Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, "The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder" by Famed prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi - Underlining and parenthetical text added for emphasis.
[2] "Damages" By Dahlia Lithwick, Slate, posted Monday, Aug. 8, 2011, at 7:22 PM ET underlining and foot note added
[3] 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
[4] "Justice is the end of government." Ibid.
[5] Paraphrased from ""We have long enough suffered under the base prostitution of law to party passions in one judge, and the imbecility of another. In the hands of one the law is nothing more than an ambiguous text, to be explained by his sophistry into any meaning which may subserve his personal malice.""as Thomas Jefferson was referring to the Judiciary in a letter To John Tyler Monticello, May 26, 1810
[6] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the gratuitous grant of malice, corruption and dishonesty!!!! "Convicted defendants left uninformed of forensic flaws found by Justice Dept." By Spencer S. Hsu, The Washington Post The Washington Post reported on cases that demonstrate problems of COMPETENCY in forensic analysis that have been known for nearly 40 years by the Justice Department.
As regards Prosecutors, "States can discipline federal prosecutors, rarely do" ("Federal prosecutors series") USAToday by Brad Heath & Kevin McCoy. As regards federal prosecutors I assert the "OPR is a black hole. Stuff goes in, nothing comes out," said Jim Lavine, the president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. "The public, the defense attorneys and the judiciary have lost respect for the government's ability to police themselves." As regards law enforcement "Convicted defendants left uninformed of forensic flaws found by Justice Dept." By Spencer S. Hsu, The Washington Post The Washington Post reported on cases that demonstrate problems of COMPETENCY in forensic analysis that have been known for nearly 40 years by the Justice Department.
[7] Making allowances for the unforeseen exigent circumstances. When such exigent circumstances occur Due Process of Law can in retrospect recover and compensate as needed.
[9] As paraphrased from "Due process" Wikipedia Thursday, May 31, 2012.
[10] "Justice is the end of government." Ibid.
[11] Justice without regard to equity impoverishes the victim at the expense of the evil they have suffered. I have been forced into poverty, homelessness for FOUR YEARS! The 1st Amendment secures the constitutional right to a lawfully un-abridge-able justifiable 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 secures the right to settle all 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.
[14] "HOW HAS THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT CHANGED THE CONSTITUTION?"18 (CCEWTP00007)
[15] We the People have fallen under the despotic spell of the concentrated power in the Supreme Court that has created ABSOLUTE POWER from ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for the "malicious or corrupt" judges, the "malicious or dishonest" prosecutor, the "knowingly false testimony by police officers" and "all (malicious, corrupt, dishonest and incompetent) persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process" acting under color of law to wit, ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION.
"All power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority: still more when you superadd the tendency or certainty of corruption by full authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it." Lord Acton, John Emerich Edward (1949), Essays on Freedom and Power, Boston: Beacon Press, p. 364
[16] Non italic parenthetical text, emphasis and underlining added for reference clarity
[17] "Suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused who has requested it violates due process where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment, irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution." Pp.8 866-88. BRADY V. MARYLAND, 373 U. S. 83 (1963)
[18] Supreme Court precedent empowers the "knowingly false testimony by police officers"[18] by saying, "There is, of course, the possibility that, despite the truthfinding safeguards of the judicial process, some defendants might indeed be unjustly convicted on the basis of knowingly false testimony by police officers." Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983)
[19] "Suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused who has requested it violates due process where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment, irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution." Pp.8 866-88. BRADY V. MARYLAND, 373 U. S. 83 (1963)
[20] Devin M. Ledom, Asst. Prosecuting Attorney, W. Steven Rives, Prosecuting Attorney, and W. James Icenogle, Prosecuting Attorney, Jay Nixon Attorney General, State of Missouri, Camden County, and City of Osage Beach (4:07-cv-0506-SOW/ CR203-1336M) ,
[21] Even after repeated motions after the hearing I still do not know the specifics of "the allegations" referenced in the finding and that formed the basis for the non-existent probable cause and finding. It was a blatant judicial act of "fraud upon the court."
[22] Robert S. Cohen , Michael T. Jamison , Emmett M. O'Brien , Steven H. Goldman , Barbara W. Wallace , James R. Hartenbach , John A. Ross , Michael D. Burton , Larry L. Kendrick , Richard C. Bresnahan , Melvyn W. Wiesman , Maura B. McShane , Colleen Dolan , Mark D. Seigel , Barbara Ann Crancer , Mary Bruntrager Schroeder , Brenda Stith Loftin , Dale W. Hood , Thea A. Sherry , Gloria Clark Reno , John R. Essner , Ellen Levy Siwak , Patrick Clifford , Bernhardt C. Drumm , Dennis N. Smith , Judy Preddy Draper , Sandra Farragut-Hemphill , Douglas R. Beach , John F. Kintz , Gary M. Gaertner , Phillip E. Jones , Carolyn C. Whittington , Tom W. DePriest , David Lee Vincent, St. Louis County and State of Missouri (4:07-CV-1116 CEJ, 03FC-10670M / 03FC-12243)
[23] US Supreme Court Writ of Certiorari 07-11115, Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, and Chief Justice John G. Roberts
[25] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the gratuitous grant of malice, corruption and dishonesty!!!!
[26] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) @ Page 460 U. S. 335 (non-italic parenthetical text, emphasis and underlining added for clarity)
[27] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the gratuitous grant of malice, corruption and dishonesty!!!!
[28] "My Articles Describing a Plan of Action," by Dr. Richard Cordero http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/2012_E/DrRCordero_jud_unaccountability_reporting.pdf
[29] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the gratuitous grant of malice, corruption and dishonesty!!!! "Convicted defendants left uninformed of forensic flaws found by Justice Dept." By Spencer S. Hsu, The Washington Post The Washington Post reported on cases that demonstrate problems of COMPETENCY in forensic analysis that have been known for nearly 40 years by the Justice Department.
[30] As regards state Prosecutors, "States can discipline federal prosecutors, rarely do" 12/08/2010 USAToday by Brad Heath & Kevin McCoy ("Federal prosecutors series"). The "OPR is a black hole. Stuff goes in, nothing comes out," said Jim Lavine, the president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. "The public, the defense attorneys and the judiciary have lost respect for the government's ability to police themselves."
As regards law enforcement "Convicted defendants left uninformed of forensic flaws found by Justice Dept." By Spencer S. Hsu, The Washington Post The Washington Post reported on cases that demonstrate problems of COMPETENCY in forensic analysis that have been known for nearly 40 years by the Justice Department.
[31] 5 U.S.C. 3331 Oath of office: "I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
[32] "absolute immunity from subsequent damages liability for all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process." Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) @ Page 460 U. S. 335 (parenthetical non italic text added for clarity)
[33] Alexander Hamilton June of 1788 at the ratification of the Constitution for the United States of America, The Federalist Papers No. 78, "The Judiciary Department"
[34] Title Criminal 18, U.S.C, § 241 & 242, and Title Civil 42 U.S.C. § 1983 & 1985 The absence of exigent circumstances should be noted.
[35] Justice without regard to equity impoverishes the victim at the expense of the evil they have suffered. I have been forced into poverty, homelessness for FOUR YEARS! The 1st Amendment secures the constitutional right to a lawfully un-abridge-able justifiable 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 secures the right to settle all 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.
[36] Montesquieu in his "De l'Espirit des Lois" (1748) (The Spirit of the Law) defines three main kinds of political systems: republican, monarchical, and despotic. Driving each classification of political system, according to Montesquieu, must be what he calls a "principle". This principle acts as a spring or motor to motivate behavior on the part of the citizens in ways that will tend to support that regime and make it function smoothly. For democratic republics (and to a somewhat lesser extent for aristocratic republics), this spring is the love of virtue -- the willingness to put the interests of the community ahead of private interests. For monarchies, the spring is the love of honor -- the desire to attain greater rank and privilege. Finally, for despotisms, the spring is the fear of the ruler. We the People have currently despotic system in that we have NO enforceable rights in America TODAY!!!!!!!!!!
[37] "All power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority: still more when you superadd the tendency or certainty of corruption by full authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it." Lord Acton, John Emerich Edward (1949), Essays on Freedom and Power, Boston: Beacon Press, p. 364
[38] 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.
[39] Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976) Prosecutorial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY
[40] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983) Police ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY
[41] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the gratuitous grant of malice, corruption and dishonesty!!!!
[42] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983) ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for "all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process"
[43] 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.
[44] 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.
[45] "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
[46] 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."
[50] Cong.Globe, 42d Cong., 1st Sess., 374 & 394
[51] "And the inference is greatly fortified by the consideration of the important constitutional check which the power of instituting impeachments… upon the members of the judicial department. This is alone a complete security. There never can be danger that the judges, by a series of deliberate usurpations on the authority of the legislature, would hazard the united resentment of the body intrusted with it, while this body was possessed of the means of punishing their presumption, by degrading them from their stations." Alexander Hamilton in FEDERALIST No. 81, "The Judiciary Continued, and the Distribution of the Judicial Authority" From McLEAN's Edition, New York. Wednesday, May 28, 1788 stated that impeachment was to be used as an integral check for "Judicial Authority"
[53] The redress of a justifiable grievance REQUIRES a remedy in BOTH law and equity
[54] 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
[55] 1st Amendment, "Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
[56] 7th Amendment "In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law."
[57] "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
[59] 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.
[63] See also USCA8 07-2614,08-1823,10-1947,11-2425 and Writs of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115&11-8211
[64] "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
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
