Thursday, December 31, 2015

​“19 Harvard Law Professors Defend Law Student Brandon Winston, Denouncing His Portrayal in “The Hunting Ground”” and “Shutting Down Conversations About Rape at Harvard Law,” BY JEANNIE SUK

​From: David G. Jeep

To: Elizabeth Bartholet (, Scott Brewer (, Charles Donahue, Jr. (, Nancy Gertner (, Janet Halley (, Bruce L. Hay (, Philip B. Heymann (, David W. Kennedy (, Duncan M. Kennedy (, Randall L. Kennedy (, Charles J. Ogletree (, Jr., Richard D. Parker (, J. Mark Ramseyer (, David Rosenberg (, Lewis D. Sargentich (, David L. Shapiro (, Henry J. Steiner (, Jeannie C. Suk (, Laurence H. Tribe (

Re: "19 Harvard Law Professors Defend Law Student Brandon Winston, Denouncing His Portrayal in "The Hunting Ground"" and "Shutting Down Conversations About Rape at Harvard Law," BY JEANNIE SUK

            I realize you all live in ivory towers and no longer have to deal with the HARD FACTS of We the People's Justice System.  But in the "Jane Crow"[1] era, the issue in "The Hunting Ground," happens EVERY DAY on a much, MUCH LARGER SCALE and DEVASTATING EXTREME.
I have, in the "Jane Crow" era, been fighting this for 12+ years, I spent 411 days in jail (Federal Inmate #36072-044[2]), I have been homeless for 8+ years, I have been through the Article III Judicial System 7 times and I have presented 6 DOCKETED AND DENIED Petitions for Writ of Certiorari[3] to the Supreme Court of the United states i.e., 07-11115, 11-8211, 13-5193, 13-7030, 14-5551 and 14-10088!!!!

I quote from my recent appeal (Eighth Circuit Appeal Case #: 15-3403, District Case #: 4:15CV1533HEA)

"If men wer"e angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary."[4]  Both the District and Circuit courts have refused to acknowledge two mandatory FACTS:

1.    ANY assertion of personal ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY, without proof of divinity, is a fraud by any standard of Justice in a government/civilization of free and equal persons on THIS PLANET!!!!![5]

2.    ANY assertion of governmental ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY, acknowledging human fallibility, is repugnant to a government/civilization of the people, by the people and for the people on THIS PLANET!!!!! [6]

BUT YET TODAY in the US of A, to paraphrase Ms. Suk's argument... "The extent of the damage comes out of the fact that "always believe" unwittingly renders the stakes of each individual case impossibly high, by linking the veracity of any one claim to the veracity of all claims. When the core belief is that the JUSTICE SYSTEM NEVER MAKES MISTAKES, if any one JUDGE / PROSECUTOR / POLICEMAN has errored, it brings into question the stability of the entire thought system, rendering uncertain all allegations of LIABILITY FOR INALIENABLE RIGHTS. But this is entire thought system, rendering uncertain all allegations of LIABILITY FOR INALIENABLE RIGHTS. But this is neither sensible nor necessary: that a few claims turn out to be false does not mean that all, most, or even many claims are wrongful. The imperative to act as though every accusation must be true—when we all know some number will not be—harms the overall credibility of LIABILITY FOR INALIENABLE RIGHTS."

I remind you of We the People's "raison d'être"[7] for incorporating with our constitution was to ESTABLISH JUSTICE…, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this constitution for the United States of America" via "rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws"
 If there is anything further I can do for you in this regard, please let me know.
Thank you in advance.
 cc:  My Blog - Thursday, December 31, 2015, 4:13:13 PM

[1] "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.
[4] FEDERALIST No. 51 – "The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances Between the Different Departments "For the Independent Journal.  Wednesday, February 6, 1788. by James Madison
[7] MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN delivered the opinion of the Court. "To criticize section 1983 liability because it leads decisionmakers to avoid the infringement of constitutional rights is to criticize one of the statute's raisons d'etre."  Owen v. City of Independence, 445 U.S. 656 (1980)

Thanks in advance,
To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process
"Agere sequitur esse"
"Time is  of the essence"
David G. Jeep, Federal Inmate #36072-044
My E-mail addresses are

(314) 514-5228

David G. Jeep
Saint Louis , MO 63155-9999
Post a Comment