Thursday, July 23, 2015

“We the People" incorporated ourselves with the “Constitution for the United States of America” to “establish Justice” and “and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity

Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Antonin Scalia
Supreme Court of the United States
Washington, DC 20543-0001


Re: Petition for Writ of Certiorari 14-10088 - USAP8 15-1057, David Gerard Jeep, v. United States – counter to "absolute immunity" for the deprivation of rights

Dear People,

In my case the issuance of the NOT "facially valid court order" [1] issued "in the "clear absence of all jurisdiction""[2] was "sufficiently clear" that every "reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates that right,"[3] i.e., the universal understanding of the IV Amendment. 

The NOT "facially valid court order" was issued "in the "clear absence of all jurisdiction."" That is to say without Common Law,[4] Constitutional Law[5] and Statute[6] Law jurisdiction.  The three jurisdictionally required elements for universally accepted Supreme Court sanctioned probable cause are:
1.    Subject Matter Jurisdiction[7]
2.    Personal Jurisdiction[8]
3.    Geographic Jurisdiction[9]
That this issue has been OPENLY ongoing now for 12+ years and six trips through the Article III District, Circuit and Supreme Court Corporation of the United States[10] only goes to show how thoroughly and unashamedly unscrupulous the Article III Judicial Corporation of the United States has become!

That the omnipresent "Jane Crow"[11] potential, that a "Government official's conduct violates clearly established law when, at the time of the challenged conduct, "[t]he contours of [a] right [are] sufficiently clear" that every "reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates that right,"[12] has not been given more attention in the municipalities, i.e., corporations, of the Federal and State Courts, goes to satisfy your restriction in Ashcroft v. Al-Kidd and then Connick v. Thompson. 

The specifics of my PWC14-10088, as considered in light of the above paragraph, easily clears the hurdle of "proving that a municipality (i.e., corporations, of the Federal and State Courts) itself actually caused a constitutional violation by failing to train the offending employee presents "difficult problems of proof," and we must adhere to a "stringent standard of fault," lest municipal liability under §1983 collapse into respondeat superior."[13]

The ubiquitous "Jane Crow" potential for spurious claims of "abuse" for an ex parte order of protection[14] was MUCH in the news for the prior decade and was clearly common knowledge in 2003 and still is unfortunately today.  It should have been addressed by the municipality (i.e., Federal and State court corporations) and trained for to avoid the "deprivation of rights" via the NOT "facially valid court order" issued in the "clear absence of all jurisdiction.""  Thus sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity are not an excuse.

"Absolute immunity" for the "the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States:" defeats the "We the People's" raisons d'etre for the incorporation with the "Constitution for the United States of America" i.e., to "establish Justice" and "and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish."  See Petition for Writ of Certiorari 14-10088

With 5% of the world's population and 25% of the world's prisoners legal authorities[15] and the press[16] are making note of the absurdity of "absolute immunity" in an attempt to "establish Justice."

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
 cc:  My Blog - Thursday, July 23, 2015, 9:09:58 AM
[1] The assertion of a misdemeanor traffic violation does not provide probable cause for a ex parte order of protection.  Clearly based on the original SERVED handwritten petition dated 11-03-03 as provided hear, there was a complete absence of jurisdiction for the stated charge.  "Consequently, it (the judge's order) can be facially invalid only if it was issued in the "clear absence of all jurisdiction." Stump v. Sparkman,435 U.S. 349, 356-57, 98 S.Ct. 1099, 55 L.Ed.2d 331 (1978) (citation omitted)." Id." PENN v. U.S. 335 F.3d 790 (2003).

[2] PENN v. U.S. 335 F.3d 790 (2003)

[3] Ashcroft V. Al-Kidd 563 U. S. _(9)_ (2011)), Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U. S. 635, 640 (1987).

[4] Magna Carta in 1215 to Entick v Carrington [1765] EWHC KB J98

[5] "AMENDMENT IV "no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause

[6] M.R.S. Protective Orders Section 455.035 "for good cause shown in the petition… An immediate and present danger of domestic violence to the petitioner"

[7] "Where there is clearly no jurisdiction over the subject matter any authority exercised is a usurped authority, and for the exercise of such authority, when the want of jurisdiction is known to the judge, no excuse is permissible." Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 351 (1871)

[8] "had no jurisdiction in the premises"  Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 339 (1871)

[9] "had no jurisdiction in the premises"  Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 339 (1871)

[10] Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of the United states i.e., 07-11115, 11-8211, 13-5193, 13-7030 , 14-5551 and NOW 14-10088

[11] "unequal protection" of the Laws based on gender discrimination via "fraud on the court" e.g., blatantly false accusation of abuse for tactical reasons in divorce and child custody proceedings.

[12] Ashcroft V. Al-Kidd 563 U. S. _(9)_ (2011)).

[13] Connick, District attorney, et al. V. Thompson no. 09–571 563 U. S. ____ (2011)

[14] The "domestic relation exception" does not present itself because the statue itself excludes it.   Proceedings independent of others - Section 455.070, "All proceedings under sections 455.010 to (This includes Protective Orders Section 455.035) 455.085 are independent of any proceedings for dissolution of marriage, legal separation, separate maintenance and other actions between the parties and are in addition to any other available civil or criminal remedies, unless otherwise specifically provided herein. (L. 1980 S.B. 524 § 13)"

[15] Stephen R. Reinhardt , Circuit Judge, a judge on the Ninth Circuit - Michigan Law Review Vol. 113:1219 and Alex Kozimski, a judge on the Ninth Circuit - 44 GEO. L.J. ANN. REV. CRIM. PROC (2015)

[16] "Supreme Court's Unsigned Rulings Show a Narrow View of Rights" New York Times, By Adam Liptak  JULY 20, 2015

Thanks in advance,
To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process
"Agere sequitur esse"
"Time is  of the essence"
David G. Jeep
http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/
My E-mail addresses are David.G.Jeep@GMail.com orDGJeep01@yahoo.com

(314) 514-5228

David G. Jeep
GENERAL DELIVERY
Saint Louis , MO 63155-9999