Clerk of Court - James G. Woodward
St. Louis - Eastern Division
Thomas F. Eagleton Courthouse
111 South 10th Street, Suite 3.300
St. Louis, MO 63102-1123
Dear Mr. Woodard,
I am enclosing here with my petition for Civil Claim and MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND FINANCIAL AFFIDAVIT, dated Friday, February 22, 2013.
If there is anything further I can do for you in this regard, please let me know.
Thank you in advance.
"Time is of the essence"
David G. Jeep
enclosure
a. "David G. Jeep, Plaintiff, vs. Government of the United States of America, et al, based on First Amendment, Bivens Action (No. 12–222. Oravec v. Cole), dated Wednesday, February 20, 2013"
b. "MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND FINANCIAL AFFIDAVIT, dated Wednesday, February 20, 2013"
cc: My Blog - Friday, February 22, 2013, 3:12:26 PM
[1] Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971)
[2] Can proceed with a lawsuit against an F.B.I. agent that accuses him of failing to properly investigate crimes.
-->
UNITED STATES EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
FEDERAL COURT - St. Louis DIVISION
David G. Jeep, Plaintiff,
vs.
Government of the United States of America, et al
US Supreme Court - Writ of Certiorari 11-82111 and The Government of the United States of America
8th District US Court of Appeals (10-1947, 11-2425 and 12-2435) and The Government of the United States of America
President Barack Hussein Obama, His Justice Department and The Government of the United States of America
Mike Christian (FBI), Lyonel Mrythill (FBI), Chris Boyce (USMS), Dan Bracco (FBI), Robert O'Connor (USMS) and Raymond Meyer (AUSA) and The Government of the United States of America
US Supreme Court - Writ of Certiorari 07-11115, and The Government of the United States of America
8th District US Court of Appeals (07-2614 & 08-1823), and The Government of the United States of America
Carol E. Jackson, US District Court Judge, 4:07-CV-1116 CEJ Jeep v. Jones et al (07-2614), and The Government of the United States of America
Scott O. Wright, Senior US District Judge, 4:07-cv-00506-SOW Jeep v. Bennett et al (08-1823), and The Government of the United States of America
Commissioner Philip E. Jones, Sr., Sharon G. Jeep (ex), Joseph A. Goeke , 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
Mr. Jack A. Bennett, Associate Circuit Judge, Mr. Devin M. Ledom, Asst. Prosecuting Attorney, Mr. Alex Little, Officer Badge #920, Mr. Tim Taylor Officer Badge #913, Mr. W. Steven Rives, Prosecuting Attorney, Mr. W. James Icenogle, Prosecuting Attorney, and Mr.
Bruce Colyer, Associate Circuit Judge, Jay Nixon Attorney General, State of Missouri,
Camden County, & City of Osage Beach,
Defendants
|
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
|
Case No. _
|
First Amendment, Bivens Action[1] (No. 12–222. Oravec v. Cole)[2]
&
Title 42 § 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights
I am petitioning the Government of the United States of America for protection of the law.
I assert Federal Jurisdiction under Title 28, Part IV, Chapter 85, Section § 1331. Federal question
"The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States."
I am petitioning for the protection of the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th and 14th Amendments to the Constitution for the United States of America, Title 18 § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law and Title 42 § 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has REFUSED to investigate the undisputed charges of deprivation of constitutionally secured rights. When I asked them to investigate in 2009, they arrested me for IMPLYING that it was their OBLIGATION to investigate, given the flagrant FRAUD on the face of the undisputed evidence in the court record that existed then and is provided here now.
I include here copies of the hand written petition that was served on me Monday November 3, 2003, as compliant with the Missouri Revised Statutes Chapter 455, Abuse—Adults and Children—Shelters and Protective Orders Section 455.035, where the Judicial officer is tasked by statute to "for good cause shown in the petition[3]" issue a warrant. The Judge in question, Joseph A. Goeke, issued a warrant without "good cause shown in the petition" much less probable cause as secured by the 4th and14th Amendments to the Constitution for the United States of America. Commissioner Jones than held me to answer his yet to be adduced charges, in FLAGRANT denial of my attorney's objection as to the violation of my constitutionally secured RIGHTS.
The issue in this FRAUDULENT, on its FACE, warrant is just the tip of the on going denial of rights. I am asking the FBI to investigate the criminal denial of rights in the complete issues as described in 2009. There are two main issues that were fraudulently and criminally linked in 2003 by corrupt, malicious and/or incompetent Judicial Officers. In 2009 both had been presented to the FBI (see appeals to the Eighth Circuit 07-2614 & 08-1823).
I am asking for the protection of the law as asserted in the seminal Supreme Court precedent "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" Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 163 (1803).
I seek damages and injunctive relief.
Damages[4]
The court obfuscated the need for damages as a remedy in BRADLEY V. FISHER, 80 U. S. 335 (1871):
"Against the consequences of [judges'] erroneous or irregular action, from whatever motives proceeding, the law has provided for private parties numerous remedies, and to those remedies they must, in such cases, resort."
That was and is an obfuscation of the facts. The law does NOT provided, for private parties, numerous remedies
In BIVENS V. SIX UNKNOWN FED. NARCOTICS AGENTS, 403 U. S. 388, Page 403 U. S. 410, Mr. Justice Harlan, concurring in the judgment of the court, was much more honest:
"For people in Bivens' shoes, it is damages or nothing."
To anyone that has suffered from the denial of their rights, privileges and immunities at the hands of an incompetent or corrupt Judge the court in BRADLEY V. FISHER sounds like Marie Antoinette's famous quote, "Let them eat cake." Of course remove the ignorance and obfuscation and there was no cake, there was no bread, the people were starving. And that is the case now; the law has NOT provided for, private parties, numerous remedies, I am starving literally and figuratively. I am impoverished and homeless. It is as Justice Harlan concurred "damages or nothing."
The damage having started with the self-proclaimed, subsequently under oath, incompetent arrest in May 2003, including the enforcement of an unconstitutional warrant "without probable cause" on Monday November 3, 2003 that took away my Son, my home and all my worldly possessions, and continues on through Tuesday, Feb 19, 2013, 9.30 years (3,396 calendar days) of the deprivation of my basic inalienable parental, property, liberty and human rights over my nearly constant objection; you add to that 411 days of incarceration without bond for utilizing my First Amendment Right to Free Speech and I am asking for:
I. Injunctive relief to overturn and expunge the DWI Conviction and remove all reference from my Driving Record and the 32 year old 1978 DWI conviction[5].
II. Injunctive relief to overturn all orders of protection between Sharon G. Jeep and David G. Jeep and remove all record of them.
III. Injunctive relief to overturn the subsequent and coupled Property and Custody Order currently in effect between David G. Jeep and Sharon G. Jeep as regards the joint marital property as of November 3, 2003 and the custody of the Minor Child Patrick Brandon Jeep (DOB 12/22/94) and remand it to a new judge for resettlement based on this ruling.
IV. I am homeless, destitute and unable to pay any filing fee for this JURY DEMAND.
V. Do I have to light myself on fire in the street to get the rights granted by my creator to all men, like the Tunisia suicide protester Mohammed Bouazizi?
VI. I would also request that the case Eastern District Court of Missouri Case #4:09-cr-00659-CDP be expunged from my record also, WITH PREJUDICE.
VII. Actual escalating Damages in the amount of: sixty-seven million six hundred twenty-five thousand eight hundred thirty-three dollars and seventy-seven cents $ 63,095,177.64
VIII. Punitive escalating damages. In the amount of: one hundred thirty-five million two hundred fifty-one thousand six hundred sixty-seven dollars and fifty-four cents $ 135,251,667.54
A total of two hundred two million eight hundred seventy-seven thousand five hundred one dollars and thirty-one cents-------------------------------------------------- $ 202,877,501.31
(as of Tuesday, Feb 19, 2013)
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Signed this Friday, February 22, 2013
Signature of Plaintiff(s)
___ _______________________________
David G. Jeep
[1] Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971)
[2] Can proceed with a lawsuit/petition involving an F.B.I. agent that accuses him of failing to properly investigate crimes i.e., provide the protection of the law.
[4] If this is not whistle blowing I do not know what is. This is corruption on a massive scale. Whistle-Blower Awarded $104 Million by I.R.S., New York Times, September 11, 2012, By DAVID KOCIENIEWSKI, Sometimes, crime does pay. If crime pays that well, I would think that my struggle for broad based Civil Rights FOR ALL should pay at least if not better than CRIME!!!!
[5] Alcohol-related driving offenses, expunged from records, when--procedures, effect--limitations
577.054. 1. After a period of not less than ten years, an individual who has pleaded guilty or has been convicted for a first alcohol-related driving offense which is a misdemeanor or a county or city ordinance violation and which is not a conviction for driving a commercial motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol and who since such date has not been convicted of any other alcohol-related driving offense may apply to the court in which he or she pled guilty or was sentenced for an order to expunge from all official records all recordations of his or her arrest, plea, trial or conviction. I was inhibited from getting this removed earlier for two reason, one being the issue in this petition. The Second being that I did not know that I could and or had to petition to have it removed.
--
Thanks in advance
To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process
"agere sequitor esse"
"Time is of the essence"
David G. Jeep
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
