Saturday, December 1, 2012

Petition for Writ of Certiorari on Appeal Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals case #12-2435

Shipment Activity        Location                               Date & Time
Delivered                WASHINGTON DC 20543                    12/05/12 11:01am
Notice Left (No          WASHINGTON DC 20543                    12/05/12 10:55am
Authorized Recipient Available)
Arrival at Unit          WASHINGTON DC 20018                    12/05/12 10:31am
Dispatched to Sort      SAINT LOUIS MO 63101                  11/30/12  5:30pm
Acceptance              SAINT LOUIS MO 63101                  11/30/12 12:43pm
Expected Delivery By:
December 3, 2012
Certified Mail

Chief Justice John G. Roberts
Supreme Court of the United States
One First Street N.E.
Washington, DC 20543-0001
Re:      Reply to letters dated October 3, 2012 and September 21, 2012 and return of Petition for Writ of Certiorari on Appeal Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals case #12-2435
 Dear Mr. Roberts,[1]
      I shouldn't need to repeat this, but alas, you appear too stupid to (be) believed, in the United States of America, Absolute Immunity QUASHES[2] Basic Human Rights,[3] The Constitution for the United States of America[4] and Statute Law.[5]  The essence of Basic Human Rights, the protection of the law, is that it is a personal one, and does not depend upon the number of persons affected, and any individual who is denied, Basic Human Rights, without Due Process of Law, under authority of the state may properly complain that their Basic Human Rights have been denied, damage has occurred and a REMEDY[6] should be available.[7]
      Why would the founding fathers, much less the current more informed though less passionately vested citizenry, even have written or supported the denial of BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS, with your asserted SOVEREIGN absolute immunity? 
      The Supreme Court has corruptly, maliciously and incompetently been pulling the proverbial wool over the eyes of We the People and HISTORY.  I offer up as clear examples of your and past corruption, your dissent as to the responsibility of Congress for the regulation of 14% of the GDP, with HEALTH CARE[8] and Blyew's (Blyew v. United States, 80 U.S. 581 (1871)) both are clear denials of JUSTICE.  "Justice is the end of government.  It is the end of civil society.  It ever has been and ever will be pursued until it be obtained, or until liberty be lost in the pursuit."[9]  Justice is incompatible with ANY grant of ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY to a humanly fallible person.[10] 
      The Supreme Court of the United States has VERY LITTLE credibility left!  The Supreme Court has embarrassed itself past, present and future beyond all REASON with its blanket grant of ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY to cover up and SPREAD its corruption, malice and incompetency.
      As referenced above I have a Petition for Writ of Certiorari on Appeal Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals case #12-2435 in your office.  We are approaching the 90 day[11] time limit referenced in the Supreme Court Rules.  I realize the Constitution or the Rule of Law has no binding authority for anyone with ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY, I can only wish it were not so. 
     I have filed FOUR appeals with 8th Circuit Court of Appeals (#11-2425, Jeep v United States of America 10-1947," Jeep v Bennett 08-1823, "Jeep v Jones 07-2614) and TWO prior humble Petitions for a Wirt of Certiorari to the Supreme Court (07-11115 and 11-8211), but to preclude any statute of limitations or issue of "vexatious"[12] or calumnious[13] actions I cite in my current petition:
      "The fraud exception to rei publicae, ut sit finis litium,[14] and nemo debet bis vexari pro una et eadam causa[15] as noted in United States v. Throckmorton, 98 U.S. 65 (1878) is applicable here "But there is an admitted exception to this general rule in cases where, by reason of something done by the successful party[16] to a suit, there was in fact no adversary trial[17] or decision[18] of the issue in the case. Where the unsuccessful party has been prevented from exhibiting fully his case by fraud or deception practiced on him by his opponent, as by keeping him away from court."  Not only was the petitioner, the unsuccessful party, never given a chance to defend himself, he was never even given the specifics of the cause for the finding under which his son, his life and all his belongs were taken."[19]
I do not like making threats, but a nuclear option[20] maybe all a victim of absolute immunity has left?  I have been struggling against your corruption for 9.55 years, 3,485 calendar days, 55,767 waking hours, 3,346,025 waking minutes, 200,761,527 waking seconds, as of Friday November 30, 2012 11:38:11.15 AM CST.  But who is counting?
     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 - Friday, November 30, 2012, 12:15:21 PM

[1] I cannot call you Chief Justice, even this reference to it makes me SICK TO MY STOMACH!!!!  The Supreme Court has with its self-serving creation of ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for itself and its sycophants, judicial (""It is a principle of our law that no action will lie against a judge of one of the superior courts for a judicial act, though it be alleged to have been done maliciously and corruptly; therefore the proposed allegation would not make the declaration good. The public are deeply interested in this rule, which indeed exists for their benefit (HOW does the potential denial of rights benefit We the People?) and was established in order to secure the independence (HOW do the judges justify independence form the Supreme Law land there WERE TO BE BOND BY?) of the judges and prevent them being harassed by vexatious actions"
-- and the leave was refused" (Scott v. Stansfield, 3 Law Reports Exchequer 220) Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 349 (1871), Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967) & Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978)), prosecutorial (Supreme Court precedent empowers the "malicious or dishonest" prosecutor by saying, "To be sure, this immunity does leave the genuinely wronged defendant without civil redress against a prosecutor whose malicious or dishonest action deprives him of liberty." Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 428 (1976)), enforcement (Supreme Court precedent empowers the "knowingly false testimony by police officers"[8] by saying, "There is, of course, the possibility that, despite the truthfinding safeguards of the judicial process, some defendants might indeed be unjustly convicted on the basis of knowingly false testimony by police officers."  Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983)) and miscellaneous henchman ("absolute immunity from subsequent damages liability for all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process." BRISCOE V. LAHUE, 460 U. S. 335 (1983))
[2] quashes - verb: - Reject as invalid, esp. by legal procedure: "his conviction was quashed on appeal".
[3] "The International Covenant on Civil and  Political Rights" adopted by the United Nations on 12/16/66, and signed by the United States  on October 5, 1977 - PART II, Article 2, Section 3. "Each State Party  to the present Covenant undertakes: (a)  To ensure that any person whose  rights or freedoms as herein recognized  are violated shall have  an effective remedy, notwithstanding  that the violation has  been committed by persons  acting in an official  capacity;
(b) To ensure that any person claiming such a remedy shall have his right thereto determined by competent judicial, administrative or legislative authorities, or by any other competent authority provided for by the legal system of the State, and to develop the possibilities of judicial remedy; (c) To ensure that the competent authorities shall enforce such remedies when granted."
[4] The Supremacy clause, Article VI § 2 of the Constitution for the United States of America, "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."
[5]  Congress passed the § 2 of the 1866 Civil rights Act (Title Civil 42 U.S.C. § 1983 & 1985) over the Veto of President Andrew Johnson, March 27, 1866.  An excerpt from his remarks attached to his veto "This provision of the bill seems to be unnecessary.. without invading the immunities of… the judiciary, always essential to the preservation of individual rights; and without impairing the efficiency of ministerial officers, always necessary for the maintenance of public peace and order." "It is, therefore, assumed that… the State courts who should render judgments in antagonism with its terms, and that marshals and sheriffs who should as ministerial officers execute processes sanctioned by State laws and issued by State judges in execution of their judgments, could be brought before other tribunals and there subjected to fine and imprisonment, for the performance of the duties which such State laws might impose."
[6] A "remedy" is what you hope to accomplish by filing suit. Remedies allowed under federal civil rights statutes include monetary damages, injunctions (court orders requiring the defendant to do something or to stop doing something), and declaratory relief (a statement by the court that your claim has been investigated and you have been found to be "in the right" and the defendant has been found to be "in the wrong," legally speaking).
[7] "The very essence of civil liberty certainly consists in the right of every individual to claim the protection of the laws whenever he receives an injury. One of the first duties of government is to afford that protection. In Great Britain, the King himself is sued in the respectful form of a petition, and he never fails to comply with the judgment of his court." (Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 163 in (1803)) Sovereign ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY was a figment of the imagination created post Civil War to RE-enslave African Americans. "That is in essence what happened with Randall v. Brigham, 74 U. S. 536 (1868) and Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 335 (1871) just post Civil War 1868 & 1871."
[9] 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
[10] ANY assertion of personal ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY, without proof of divinity, is a fraud, by any standard of Justice, law and equity,  in a government of free and equal persons on THIS PLANET!!!!! 
ANY assertion of governmental ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY, acknowledging un-avoidable human fallibility, is a fraud, by any standard of Justice, law and equity, in a government of the people, by the people and for the people on THIS PLANET!!!!!
[11] Rule 13. Review on Certiorari: Time for Petitioning. I originally submitted on September 15, 2012, plus 90 days equals December 15, 2012.
[12] Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 349 (1871) "The public are deeply interested in this rule, which indeed exists for their benefit and was established in order to secure the independence of the judges and prevent them being harassed by vexatious actions," in all cases it is the judiciary's responsibility to avoid "vexatious" or calumnious actions to the best of their ability not concede to their inevitability.  "Vexatious" or calumnious actions are hazards in any human endeavor
[13] Floyd and Barker (1607) "And those who are the most sincere, would not be free from continual Calumniations," in all cases it is the judiciary's responsibility to avoid "vexatious" or calumnious actions to the best of their ability not concede to their inevitability.  "Vexatious" or calumnious actions are hazards in any human endeavor.
[14] It is for the public good that there be an end of litigation.
[15] No-one shall be tried or punished twice in regards to the same event, "double jeopardy."
[16] The combination of the TWO issues into one created the DEVASTATION in my life.  The successful parties to the suit include the Judge Goeke, Commissioner Jones, Sharon G. Jeep and Kristen Capps in 03FC-010670 and Judge Bennett's conspiracy, Judge Colyer, The Prosecutors (denial of exculpable evidence) and Police Officers (false testimony) in CR203-1336M.
[17] Probable cause is the most element of all evidence.  How can you have a trial when there is no viable probable cause provided (Eighth Circuit court of appeals case 07-2614 (4:07-CV-1116 CEJ, 03FC-10670M / 03FC-12243))? 
[18] Eighth Circuit court of appeals case 08-1823 (4:07-cv-0506-SOW/ CR203-1336M) where the prosecutors denied pretrial motions for exculpable evidence (Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 87 (1963), "We now hold that the suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due process where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment, irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution.")
[19] See item 12 on pages 17 and 18 of 27 on the signed notarized and dated petition Wednesday, September 26, 2012, as previously submitted on the same date.
[20] I can only assert that I am willing to die for my cause.  I have direct knowledge that my death will not go unnoticed on at least 6 of the 7 continents on this planet.  If you think the Arab Spring started by Tarek al-Tayeb Mohamed Bouazizi (29 March 1984 – 4 January 2011) suicide was big deal.  He was just a Tunisian street vendor who set himself on fire on 17 December 2010, in protest of the confiscation of his wares and the harassment and humiliation that he reported was inflicted on him by a municipal official and her aides.  This has been a 9.55 year struggle.  Four years ago I was illegally incarcerated for 411 days because I spoke out asking for alternatives to your CORRUPTION of JUSTICE!!!!!

Thanks in advance

To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process
"agere sequitor esse"
"Time is of the essence"
David G. Jeep
E-mail is preferred,
(314) 514-5228

David G. Jeep
c/o The Bridge
1610 Olive Street,
Saint Louis, MO 63103-2316