Monday, May 16, 2016


Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Supreme Court of the United States
One First Street N.E.
Washington, DC 20543-0001

Re:      PWC 15-8884 - David Gerard Jeep and heir, Petitioner v. United States (corporation) - USAP8 15-3403 - MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF "LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS" AND REHEARING ON THE MERITS.

Dear Ginsburg,

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable" (John F. Kennedy).  "Any un-enacted "policy" proclamation by judicial officials who uniquely benefit from their self-legislation does and should suffer the presumption of reckless-illegitimacy."[1]

If you are wondering when or how I lost respect for you, and your quisling, it was about five, maybe six well-reasoned[2] unconstitutionally denied Petitions for Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court ago…  i.e., 07-11115, 11-8211, 13-5193, 13-7030, 14-5551,  and 14-10088!

Are you atomistically myopic?  Proverbially speaking, "You cannot see the forest for the trees."  You say my petition is frivolous, malicious[3] or both, how?

You and the general public are all probably salivating for the Supreme Court's first take on the "transgender restroom issue."  Transgender persons in the United States of America  amount to maybe 0.22%[4] of the population.  The issue of restroom use as a constitutional right is debatable, as yet unestablished.

Yet my petition in regard to a long well-established right[5] violated by actors "under color of law" i.e., unreasonable probable cause" for the undeniably ubiquitous and commonplace use of an unconstitutional ex parte order of protection over many years in many states, in genderdisputes that realistically could affect 50+% of the population is frivolous?  My issue's population clearly has 200+ times the gravitas of transgender's 0.22% of the population want-a-be restroom issue.  GET A GRIP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As regards the potential for malice, as it is very closely related to Justice.  I offer an example, I have four fingers on my right hand, I ask the court to cut off a finger on your right hand without reason.  That is malice. 

But if you had cut off my finger, and I asked the court to cut off your finger that is biblical justice.  Civilized 7th Amendment CONSTITUTIONAL justice would be to ask for a financial award for a remedy. 

The "unreasonable probable cause" for the undeniably ubiquitous and clichéd use of an unconstitutional ex parte order of protection in my dispute put me on the street taking my son, my home, everything in the world I once held dear and then forcing me into an un-justice, unequal, and unconstitutional system Article III system, where my fraudulent[6] and criminal[7] adversaries had been empowered by possession of everything that had been taken from me, my son, my home, everything in the world I once held dear.

I am not asking for Biblical Justice I am asking for a Civilized 7th Amendment CONSTITUTIONAL justice, a financial award for a remedy.

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 - Monday, May 16, 2016, 3:26:58 PM

[2] Picking v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 152 F.2d 753 (3d Cir. 1945)
[3] See Rule 39.8.
[4] How Many People are Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender?
By Gary J. Gates April 2011 - The Williams Institute
[5] 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th Amendment right
[6] Sharon G. Jeep (spouse) and Kristen M. Capps (stepdaughter) Missouri Revised Statutes Section MRS –474.150.1 Gifts in fraud of marital rights--presumptions on conveyances and 570.030.2 Robbery Stealing and Related Offenses, AND 18 U.S. Code § 1001 - Statements or entries generally
[7] 18 USC §241 - §242 Criminal Deprivation of rights under color of law

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 (formerly)
My E-mail addresses are or

(314) 514-5228

David G. Jeep
Saint Louis , MO 63155-9999

Post a Comment