Monday, February 2, 2009

Eric H. Holder, Jr., U.S. Attorney General Re: Civil Rights and Judicial Terrorism

Monday, February 02, 2009

Eric H. Holder, Jr., U.S. Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001

Re: Civil Rights and Judicial Terrorism
The Rule of Law, Robin Hood, and Testilying
8th Circuit Court of Appeals (08-1823) and the Writ of Certiorari (07-11115)

Dear Mr. Holder,

How does a Citizen establish his or her “rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws ” after the illegal and unconstitutional deprivation of said rights via judicial terrorism and over the assertion of the illegal and unconstitutional judge made law, “absolute immunity”?????

This is terrorism by those acting under color of law at the expense of our Constitutional rights and the Rule of Law. Do we live under the Rule of Law or do we live under the terror of those who enforce it without need to consider our “rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws ”?????

I have had enough terror. Can you give me hope?

My quest started as a letter of complaint to the “Commission on Retirement, Removal and Discipline of Judges ” on Wednesday October 8, 2003, two days after I was terrorized and illegally thrown in jail, Monday October 6, 2003, for the lack of an operating cell phone. On November 3, 2003 my then wife (now ex-wife) used that illegal non-violent imprisonment as the soul cause of action for a warrant lacking probable cause, an Ex-Parte Order of Protection, to terrorize me as illegally and unconstitutionally ordered by Judge Goeke. These were both clearly acts of judicial terrorism against my constitutional rights. These were only the first of several in a series of subsequent acts of judicial terrorism. The obviously deficient warrant had me thrown out of my house and in effect took away my son illegally and unconstitutionally. As one would expect, having your world taken from you, this action had an enormous detrimental effect on my life from that point forward.

In Commissioner Jones’s court my original attorney of record on the issue in Writ of Certiorari (07-11115), made objections to Commissioner Jones in court before, during and after, then followed up with two additional motions to Commissioner Jones in writing subsequent to our court appearance as regards “the lack of probable cause”. I made several written objections to Commissioner Jones’s actions to every power that had a mailing address. Commissioner Jones is/was not Judge he is an employee of the 21st District Court. These were public officers of the court and all the motions/complaints are matters of public record. I can assure you this was not a “good faith effort” misplaced paperwork SNAFU as described in Van de Kamp v. Goldstein (07-854) or in Herring v. United States (07-513). I brought up all the constitutional and legal issues repeatedly and continuously if in the courtroom and immediately in writing after. The defendants have known from Day One, exactly what they had done and were doing was illegal and unconstitutional. And I have been actively pursuing both issues simultaneously vociferously for over five years. There is NO WAY anyone overlooked these issues.

I am here as a person still fighting, over five years later, for a father’s unquestionable rights to his son. And I will go to my death fighting for my rights as a Father. I have been terrorized and my hopes have been trampled down by TWO denials by the Supreme Court on the Writ of Certiorari (07-11115). I am not fashionable enough to attain the Supreme Court’s attention.

I am symbolically here on my hands and knees BEGGING for something to hope for. I seek the protection of your criminal prosecution of the defendants as described in the Writ of Certiorari (07-11115) and the issue of the 8th District Court of Appeals (08-1823). I ask you to prosecute them criminally for the same cause of action under, Title 18 Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law, to give the issue more high fashion visibility to indulge the Supreme Court’s ego issues.

I have been terrorized and humiliated by those charged with the defense and protection of my “rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws ” under color of law. I am humiliated and ashamed of my Country and the Rule of Law. How can I give my son any guidance or hope for the future when, “We the People” have no rights in this country. We are the vassals to the at-will terrorist rule of the Guild of Judges.

I love my son. But, I am not a person, under the rule of the Guild of Judges, worthy of his love and respect, though he gives it unquestioningly. This country is not worthy of his respect. I write to him everyday, sometimes several times, via e-mail. I can’t afford a phone. I get only the intermittent responses that you would expect from a busy 14 year-old with a burgeoning life in front of him. He makes me VERY PROUD, I quote from his recent e-mail, “just watched the movie gran torino and it made me think "who is my role model" I said my father and then remembered to e-mail you right away”. He says that, as he knows I am homeless, destitute and I have failed numerous times in my legal attempts to establish my rights as a person and as a father. My rights / status as a father are obviously unquestioned by my son. I have spent all that I have, retirement funds, time and sweat, in this quest for my rights as a person to be his father.

But as a person without the “rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws ” I am subject to the terror and humiliation of the at-will discretion of the Guild of Judges; with their all-powerful self-serving Judge made Law, “absolute immunity”. They can do whatever they want; our rights be dammed. We are terrorized and humiliated at the Guild of Judge’s will.

Without rights we have nothing. Without the right to Due Process of Law, short of violence you have no claim to paternity, property, life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness. If the first action of the court is to deny you Due Process of law, serve a deficient warrant and then force you to appear in a Terrorist’s Court without specific charges, where new charges are cook up on the fly during the hearing on said illegal deficient and surprise self-serving Ex-Parte Order, you can do nothing but take what they leave you. You are in effect kneecapped and crippled from that point forward, unable to compete, much less fight. You are the victim of criminal judicial terrorism. I have been to the Supreme Court twice now; you have no appeal against their illegal, unconstitutional self-serving judge made law of immunity. I have to ask; will judicial immunity ever be relinquished if the issue is at the discretion of those who benefit from its terrorist rule?

As I am sure you are aware, a slave in this country pre-civil war had no rights. A slave had no right to property, to paternity, to freedom. The 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments were ratified by “We the People” to assure that would not happen to “any person” every again.

I dare say I never intended nor did I think I would ever be in this position. For nearly 50 years I naively assumed my Rights were enforceable. I am sure, there are millions of similarly naive men and woman that have not as yet, and if they are lucky never will, run up against our judiciary. I am here begging, symbolically on my hands and knees, for my “rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws ”. The Guild of Judges has acted unconstitutionally and illegally as consummate terrorists, denying my “rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws ”.

I hesitate to mention, “the race card”, but you have probably never before been asked by a white, educated, former upper middle class, card carrying alumnus of a very old, Old Boys School for assistance with a Civil Rights Issue. But as I am also sure you know, rights are important. Rights are the core of our existence; Rights are not given or awarded for good behavior; Rights are the quintessential core of what cannot be taken away without access to Rule of Law, i.e. Due Process of Law.

Why did we fight a revolutionary war, to replace the terror of a King with the terror of a judicial power without limit based on “absolute immunity”? Why did we enumerate our rights in a written constitution, if we were intent on letting the Judiciary do as they please with our enumerated rights?

I say again, there is no immunity of any kind called for, defined or awarded in the constitution. The Guild of Judges asserts this un-enumerated, unconstitutional right based on common English law stare decisis. Their assertion of absolute immunity is based on the historical common law stare decisis of “sovereign immunity” as it related to the King and his court. The King’s will was the law, thus there was no way criminally or civilly to prosecute him in his own court. Whatever law used to sue a king, the king could change at-will to his advantage. What the Guild of Judges today fails to see is that we replaced the King’s will 230 years ago with a written constitution and The Rule of Law via a revolution. The Rule of Law and the Constitution are not at anyone’s discretion; they cannot be easily changed. Thus Common Law based on a King’s easily mutable self-serving at-will Law is inapplicable.

It is as Thomas Paine stated at the time of our revolution, “In America the law is King. For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other”. The Law / The Constitution as King does not afford anyone immunity, it was and is intended to be egalitarian to all there is no elite ruling class protection, i.e. immunity. I quote from Justice John Marshall Harlan dissent in Plessy v. Ferguson, “in view of the Constitution, in the eye of the law, there is in this country no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens. There is no caste here. Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens. In respect of civil rights, all citizens are equal before the law.” In dissent he got it right then, he still has it right TODAY.

The concept of immunity is antithetical to the Rule of Law in any equalitarian Constitutional Government. You and I as citizens of the United States of America are entitled to the “rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws .” Per Title 18 Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law and Title 42 The Public Health and Welfare § 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights, “We the People” have enforceable rights since originally enacted in 1871. You have the obligation , as a servant of “We the People”, to prosecute criminally to enforce our rights. “We the People” have the right to prosecute civilly to enforce our rights, i.e. sue for damages. Clearly there is no immunity described, awarded or discussed in the statute. Title 18 Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law and Title 42 The Public Health and Welfare § 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights as positive written law post Civil War supersedes and displaces any and all obsolete historical English common law dependent upon a repudiated royal office / King.

Immunity is antithetical to The Rule of Law.

There is a rogue element in our society that thinks we need a “Robin Hood” or a “Dirty Harry, The Enforcer” outside the Rule of Law. Allowing “Robin Hood”, while possibly charismatic and seductive on the surface at the movies, in real life allows some people to be immune from the law. That works fine if you are a member of the currently fashionable politically correct element favored by “Robin Hood” and his merry men. But if you are not you need the Rule of Law to protect your Rights. My situation is not that I am discriminated against; my case is not a specific recurring trend; my situation is not that I am criminal; my situation is that I am not fashionable. My opponents hold the stage. It does not take broad based discrimination or multiple prior denials to establish the denial of a person’s civil rights. Rights are immediately vested all the time, every time they are needed to the person not the race or the caste or only to the fashionable. Our forefathers had been persecuted and forced from Europe for there unfashionable religious beliefs. They were very sensitive to the unfashionable minority interest in writing the Bill of Rights i.e., Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Assembly and Due Process of Law.

The Idea of “Robin Hood’s” or anyone’s immunity is antithetical to the Rule of Law. We the People cannot allow anyone acting wantonly and willfully without regard to the rights of others and the Rule of Law in our constitutionally free and equalitarian society. I have to ask, will judicial immunity ever be relinquished if the issue is at the discretion of those who benefit from its terrorist rule?

In my situation, “Robin Hood’s” band of merry men have not been physically violent, they have not acted for personal profit, they have simply deprived me of my son, property, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness via the deprivation of my “rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws ”. Why have they done it, they want to control with terror? They have gotten away with it because I am out of fashion. I cannot command the limelight. Now maybe if I was a white supremacist or indigent minority I could. But I am just a white former upper middle class, educated male; I have no claim to fame or sensationalism. To date in this country, that means my rights are unenforceable. I cannot command the high fashion ability it requires to get the attention of Supreme Court. I have to ask, will judicial immunity ever be relinquished if the issue is at the discretion of those who benefit from its terrorist rule?

I have the defendants RED HANDED under the Rule of Law with undisputable evidence, deficient warrants, certifiable trial transcripts, of their culpability and their crimes. Robin’s men, the Judiciary, the prosecutors, the police, and my ex-wife (acting ex-parte as an officer of the court, as a presumed victim of abuse) have acted willfully and criminally to the deprivation of my “rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws. ”

Do you believe in the random at-will application of terror by those acting under color of law, with out regard to your rights or do you believe in the Rule of Law? We do not live under the Rule of Law, we live under the rule of terror by the police, the prosecutors and the judges, protected by their judge decreed immunity, ask any of the unfashionable people. The rights of the unfashionable are ignored everyday.

The Defendants in the Writ of Certiorari (07-11115) have denied me protection of the 4th, 5th and 14th Amendments. The Defendants in the related U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals (08-1823) falsely imprisoned me, withheld exculpable information, presented false evidence, perjured themselves, suborned perjury, refused me protection of the law and then acted in a conspiracy to cover up there misconduct, all in violation of the 6th and 14th Amendments.

As I am sure you are aware perjury and fraud, a.k.a testilying, is the weapon of choice for those acting under color of law to suppress fair Due Process of Law. They were too stupid for belief in their testilying in my cases.

Under the issue in the writ (07-11115), the defendants openly and undeniably served a deficient warrant and then helped the then petitioner, now defendant, to answer for the deficient warrant at the hearing, creating specifics via surprise self-serving testilying as the basis for the new and improved full order. Thus denying the petitioner’s right to prior specific knowledge of the charge, to defend him against said charge.

The criminal issues at the center of the appeal (08-1823) after the false imprisonment and before the conviction they withheld exculpable information, presented false evidence, perjured themselves, suborned perjury, refused me protection of the law and then acted in a conspiracy to cover up there misconduct. The defendants perjured and suborned perjury themselves / testilied about the specifics of their own, subsequently independently verified, police procedures and prior sworn testimony on the witness stand under oath. The issues are too numerous to detail here they are described in the legal brief filed with appeal, which can be provided via e-mail.

There are few if any more eloquent opinions than the description of the Rule of Law as it relates to the prosecutorial function by Mr. Justice Sutherland with the opinion of the court in Berger v. United States (295 U.S. 78 (1935)). “The United States Attorney is the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all, and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done. As such, he is in a peculiar and very definite sense the servant of the law, the two-fold aim of which is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer. He may prosecute with earnestness and vigor -- indeed, he should do so. But, while he may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much his duty to refrain from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction as it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one. ” I seek the impartial Rule of Law. I seek your assistance as my “constitutional rights ”. As Justice Brandeis said “there is no better policemen than an electric light.”

Will you help me bring light to the issue of self-serving, self-supporting unconstitutional judicial terrorism empowered by immunity?

I do not have to tell you as an African American attorney that if you had had access to the Rule of Law, the right to sue, as defined in 1871 by the first Civil Rights Act and currently codified in the U.S. Code as Title 42 The Public Health and Welfare § 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights post "separate but equal" (Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896)), you may not have been able to eliminate the separate, but you certainly could have seen to the equal portion. I am talking about suing not only for Law School Admissions as in the Sweatt v. Painter, 339 U.S. 629 (1950), 80 years later. I feel confident with access to the Rule of Law you would have been suing for equal Drinking Fountains and Restrooms, not to mention EQUAL wages, neighborhoods, Kindergartens, Grade Schools and High Schools in 1871. If we lived under the Rule of Law in 1871, “equal” could have been established via the Rule of Law. But then as now, the Guild of Judges has too much discretion in what they will consider, thus their pocket veto establishes their rule by judicial law. We need to put a GLARING SPOTLIGHT on this royalist leftover claim to power and put an end to it NOW!!!!!

The Criminal Guild of Judges has been able to suppress the Rule of Law and maintain immunity for themselves and others, illegally and unconstitutionally for way tooooooooooooo long as their tool of terror.

Now I have said this before and I will repeat, “people are going to die. ”. I feel confident you have to agree, people have already died for judicial immunity as it relates to Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896). If I were to trip tomorrow morning in the shower and fall to my death; my story, my case are out there; and as sure as the sun is going to rise someone will take up the cause. And unless we deal with it here and now I have to agree with Justice Hugo Black, “people are going to die. ”.

It is my sincere hope that does not happen. But I assure you, others and I will die so that “government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth “.

I think the Do-Over for the oath office as described in the attached letter to Chief Justice Roberts gives us a clear opening to attack the Guild of Judge’s assertion of infallibility and “absolute immunity”. Not that we need one, there is no immunity called for or defined in the Constitution.

This is not about discrimination or law school admissions;
This is about judicial terrorism and the Rule of Law.

If there is anything further I can do for you in this regard, please let me know.

Thank you in advance.

David G. Jeep

letter dated 01-22-09 to Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.

cc: President Barack Hussein Obama
A select group of favorites, via e-mail

No comments: