Thursday, July 28, 2016

lol - St. Louis ex-prosecutor gets probation for helping cover up police detective's beating of handcuffed man

Only a victim of Judicial Immunity knows the cost.  Henry Edward Autrey is a Black robed royalist degenerate.  The grant of immunity by  judges outside of statute authorization i.e., 18 U.S. Code § 6002 - Immunity generally, is WITHOUT JURISDICTION of any Article III court.

Judicial Absolute Immunity is malicious, corrupt, incompetent and DEGENERATE in that everyone that is involved from its victims, myself, to its proponents is dragged down, DEGENERATED, to the lowest level of malice, corruption and incompetence.  Some of us fighting, screaming and protesting; others willing - Henry Edward Autrey. 


Any help in my 13 year struggle with 8.5 years homeless, 411 days in jail and 7 trips (07-11115, 11-8211, 13-5193, 13-7030, 14-5551 14-10088 and 15-8884 [1]) to the Black Robed Royalist posers on the Supreme Court would be appreciated??



Robert Patrick
St. Louis Post Dispatch
900 North Tucker Blvd.
Saint Louis, MO 63101-1069

Re: The criminal,[2] one Henry Edward Autrey, - Case #4:15CV1533HEA - David G. Jeep and heir, Plaintiff, vs. Government (corporation) of the United States of America, et al Defendants/Respondents Appeal 15-3403

Dear Mr. Patrick,

"To bereave a man of life, [says he] or by violence to confiscate his estate, without accusation or trial, would be so gross and notorious an act of despotism, as must at once convey the alarm of tyranny throughout the whole nation"[3]

But alas today some 246 years after Blackstone first said it, 227 years after Hamilton repeated, with 620,000 deaths in the Civil war, countless deaths in subsequent Jim Crow Southern Victory in the courts we have come to the Jane Crow Era[4] where any man can be "bereaved of life, [says he] or by violence to confiscate his estate, without accusation or trial," without any notice in the popular press.

I have, in the "Jane Crow" era, been fighting this for 12+ years, I spent 411 days in jail,[5] I have been homeless for 7+ 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 to the Supreme Court of the United States i.e., 07-11115, 11-8211, 13-5193, 13-7030, 14-5551 and 14-10088[6]!!!!

A woman who FALSELY claims abuse should be imprisoned as the WORST ABUSER WOULD BE and have no say in the custody or raising of her children. Because she is not a mother but a CHILD ABUSER, DEBAUCHER and a THIEF!!!!

Fathers are of the utmost importance, if not essential, even in the Jane Crow era!!!!

I have uncontested PROOF of judicial, prosecutorial and police corruption regarding a flagrant "beyond doubt" "facially invalid court order," prosecution's denial of exculpable evidence and perjured/false testimony only made possible by said denial!!!!

The FRAUDULENT,[7] unwarranted, unreasonable, criminal[8] & UNCONSTITUTIONAL[9] combination of two UNRELATED infamous issues, one as probable cause for the other, the "gravamen," into a, "'beyond debate,'"[10] not "facially valid court order" [11] i.e.,:

1.  Exparte Order of Protection (03FC-10670M / 03FC-12243)
2.  An ALLEGED Misdemeanor Traffic Issue (CR203-1336M)

issued or adjudicated, respectively, that is coram non judice[12] because of "a complete absence of all jurisdictions."[13]

We APPARENTLY need a constitutional amendment to END the judicial sanction of malice, corruption, dishonesty, sincere ignorance, conscientious stupidity and Incompetence.

I right to you because you recently wrote an article "Prosecutor pleads guilty in cover-up of beating."[14]  In that article you glorified a criminal,[15] one Henry Edward Autrey, United States District Judge[16] at the expense of a wet behind the ears young prosecutors.  MT Autrey had recently confirmed his brethren's conspiracy against rights by dis missing my case.  It all comes down to what is reasonable probable cause.  Mt Autrey would assert a police office has never has reasonable probable cause to beat a hand-cuffed prisoner.  I would assert that a Judge never has reasonable probable cause to exparte issue am order of protection citing an ALLEGED Misdemeanor Traffic Issue (CR203-1336M). 

My ex-spouse like many woman of her generation in the Jane Crow Era fraudulently[17]  used the court to establish custody of my son, possession of my private and joint property, OUR HOUSE.

Any help you could offer to publicize my case, HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

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 28, 2016, 3:25:38 PM


[2] Originally enacted as The Civil Rights Act of 1866 and 1871 (now codified in Federal Statute laws as Criminal 18 U.S.C. § 241 & 242 and Civil  42 USC §1983 - §1985). The author of § 1 clearly stated the relationship between the two Acts in introducing the 1871 measure:
"My first inquiry is as to the warrant which we have for enacting such a section as this [§ 1 of the 1871 Act]. The model for it will be found in the second section of the act of April 9, 1866, known as the 'civil rights act.' That section provides a criminal proceeding in identically the same case as this one provides a civil remedy for, except that the deprivation under color of State law must, under the civil rights act, have been on account of race, color, or former slavery. This section of the bill, on the same state of facts, not only provides a civil remedy for persons whose former condition may have been that of slaves, but also to all people where, under color of State law, they or any of them may be deprived of rights to which they are entitled under the Constitution by reason and virtue of their national citizenship." BRISCOE V. LAHUE, 460 U. S. 357 (1983)
[3] FEDERALIST No. 84 "Certain General and Miscellaneous Objections to the Constitution Considered and Answered" From McLEAN's Edition, New York. Wednesday, May 28, 1788, by Alexander Hamilton - As quoted form Blackstone's Commentaries, Vol. 4, p. 438.
[4] The "Jane Crow" Era, "It doesn't take a cynic to point out that when a woman is getting a divorce, what she may truly fear is not violence, but losing the house or kids. Under an exparte order of protection, if she's willing to fib to the judge and say she is "in fear" of her children's father, she will get custody and money and probably the house."
[5] St. Louis Post Dispatch Arrest - March 12, 2009 "I was Arrested in violation of my First Amendment Right to Free Speech... for asking for my rights" http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2009/03/i-was-arrested-in-violation-of-my-first.html
[7] fraus omnia corrumpit "Fraud corrupts all." A principle according to which the discovery of fraud invalidates all aspects of a judicial decision - 18 U.S. Code Chapter 47 - Fraud And False Statements and  Criminal 18 U.S.C. § 241 & 242 Deprivation of Rights
[8] 18 USC § 242 – CRIMINAL Deprivation of rights under color of law
[9] 4th and 14th Amendment deprivation of "reasonable probable cause"
[10] Stanton v. Sims, 571 U. S. ___, ___ (2013) (per curiam) (slip op., at 8) beyond debate." Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U. S. 731, 741 (2011).
[11] The assertion of an alleged misdemeanor traffic violation does not provide probable cause for an ex parte order of protection.  Clearly based on the original SERVED handwritten petition dated 11-03-03 as provided here (or with my District/Circuit/Supreme Court petition), 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). 
[12] Any indictment or sentence passed by a court which has no authority to try an accused of that offence, is clearly in violation of the law and would be coram non judice and a nullity.
[13] PENN v. U.S. 335 F.3d 786 (2003)
[14] by Robert Patrick St. Louis Post-Dispatch Tuesday October 27, 2009
[15] Originally enacted as The Civil Rights Act of 1866 and 1871 (now codified in Federal Statute laws as Criminal 18 U.S.C. § 241 & 242 and Civil  42 USC §1983 - §1985). The author of § 1 clearly stated the relationship between the two Acts in introducing the 1871 measure:
"My first inquiry is as to the warrant which we have for enacting such a section as this [§ 1 of the 1871 Act]. The model for it will be found in the second section of the act of April 9, 1866, known as the 'civil rights act.' That section provides a criminal proceeding in identically the same case as this one provides a civil remedy for, except that the deprivation under color of State law must, under the civil rights act, have been on account of race, color, or former slavery. This section of the bill, on the same state of facts, not only provides a civil remedy for persons whose former condition may have been that of slaves, but also to all people where, under color of State law, they or any of them may be deprived of rights to which they are entitled under the Constitution by reason and virtue of their national citizenship." BRISCOE V. LAHUE, 460 U. S. 357 (1983)
[16] See also my blog "I would much prefer that you sell tickets to the prosecutors to watch the infliction of my hand cuffed beating ending with a gun shoved down my throat by a violent police officer"  http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2015/10/i-would-much-prefer-that-you-sell.html
[17] fraus omnia corrumpit "Fraud corrupts all." A principle according to which the discovery of fraud invalidates all aspects of a judicial decision - 18 U.S. Code Chapter 47 - Fraud And False Statements and  Criminal 18 U.S.C. § 241 & 242 Deprivation of Rights

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)
http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/  or www.DGJeep.com
My E-mail addresses are David.G.Jeep@GMail.com or Dave@DGJeep.com 

(314) 514-5228

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