“4-Year-Old Can Be Sued, But a Judge Can’t Be”

Justices of the Supreme Court

Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, John G. Roberts, Samuel Alito, and Sonia Sotomayor

c/o Supreme Court of the United States

One First Street N.E.

Washington, DC 20543-0001

Re: Judicial and Justice Department Liability

       “4-Year-Old Can Be Sued, But a Judge Can’t Be”

Dear Justices,

      We all know that “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.[1]”

      We all know that the 14^th Amendment states that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

      Even if common law did supercede, Blackstone’s “The Commentaries on the 18th-century common law of England” 1769 as quoted in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U. S. 137 (1803) “it is a settled and invariable principle in the laws of England that every right, when withheld, must have a remedy, and every injury its proper redress." supercedes Floyd and Barker. (1607) Easter Term, 5 James, I In the Court of Star Chamber.  So where do you get off awarding ABSOLUTE immunity like “Halloween Candy” to everyone at the expense of the rights of “We the People’s” for redress as assured by the 1^st Amendment, “Congress shall make no law… abridging… the right of the people... to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

      I, again, beg of you, I am a person; I am a father that has had his rights stolen by a negligent, incompetent, corrupt and malicious system.  I thought I had rights.  I need your help.  I have NOTHING left.  Please give the “Jane Crow” era, Jeep v. United States of America[2] your consideration. 

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

“Time is of the essence”

Thank you in advance.

Dave@DGJeep.com 

David G. Jeep

cc:  file

“4-Year-Old Can Be Sued,

But a Judge Can’t Be”

      “A 4-Year-Old Can Be Sued, Judge Rules in Bike Case.”  “Citing cases dating back as far as 1928, a New York State Supreme Court Justice[3] has ruled that a young girl accused of running down an elderly woman while racing a bicycle with training wheels on a Manhattan sidewalk two years ago can be sued for negligence.[4]”

      But a Judge cannot be sued for negligence, or corruption, or malice.  Does anybody see an issue here?????  The Judiciary has, without the consent of “We the People,” awarded itself, the Justice Department[5], the Judges[6], the Prosecutors[7] and the Police[8] absolute immunity from liability for the deprivation of OUR rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws. 

This is INSANITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      The Supreme Court, the Justice department, the Judges and the police per “We the People” in our constitutional law[9], common law[10], criminal statutory law[11] and civil statutory law[12] are liable for the criminal deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.  But the Supreme Court, via their own JUDGE MADE LAW, has awarded themselves absolute immunity from our democratically constitutionally obligatory Rule of Law.  And NOW they want to say that a “4-Year-Old Can Be Sued, Judge Rules in Bike Case”

      Immunity by DEFINITION is diametrically opposed to the Rule of Law.  Immunity puts someone outside the reach of the obligatory Rule of Law.  Our Justice system is by definition based on the democratic, constitutional, equal protection obligatory Rule of Law not the rule of an oligarchy or single man.  Our Justice System is authorized and defined by our Constitution to enforce the Rule of Law per our rights, privileges or immunities as secured by the Constitution and Laws of the United States of America.

      BUT, Per JUDGE MADE LAW an elected or a confirmed or an appointed Judiciary Officer, with possibly a lifetime appointment, can not be held accountable and SUED for his negligence, or his corruption, or his malicious actions under Color of Law but a “4-Year-Old Can Be”?????

Something is VERY wrong here!!!!!!

This is insanity!!!!!!

      Just be thankful you have not been randomly selected for their illegal, unconstitutional treatment via IMMUNITY.  Please give the “Jane Crow” era, Jeep v. United States of America[13] your consideration.  If there is anything further I can do for you in this regard, please let me know.

---

[1] Article VI § 2 of the Constitution for the United States of America

[2] A Petition for a Writ of Certiorari, Jeep v United States of America “Opposed to Immunity” currently on file in the Supreme Court clerk’s office, 8^th District Court of appeals Appeal: 10-1947, U.S. Federal Court Eastern District of Missouri Case No. Case 4:10-CV-101-TCM -- State Court Case No.: 03FC-10670M, Missouri Court of Appeals eastern District ED84021, U.S. District Court Eastern District of Missouri Jeep v. Jones et al, 4:07-cv-01116-CEJ, 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 07-2614, Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115 & State Court Case # CR203-1336M, Missouri Court of Appeals Southern District SD26269, U.S. District Court Western District of Missouri 07-0506-CV-W-SOW Jeep v Bennett, et al, 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 08-1823 (http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/).

[3] Justice Paul Wooten of the New York State Supreme Court in Manhattan

[4] New York Times, New York edition, Published: October 28, 2010, A version of this article appeared in print on October 29, 2010, on page A24 By ALAN FEUER,

[5] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) @ Page 460 U.S. 335 “In short, the common law provided absolute immunity from subsequent damages liability for all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process.”  It should be noted that the common law referenced here is Floyd and Barker. (1607) Easter Term, 5 James I In the Court of Star Chamber.  This was superceded 160 years later by the codification of Common Law by Blackstone in “The Commentaries on the 18th-century common law of England” 1765-1769 and 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.”

[6] Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967) Judges have ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY

[7] Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1976) We hold only that, in initiating a prosecution and in presenting the State's case, the prosecutor is immune from a civil suit for damages under § 1983.  A prosecutor can knowingly prosecute a false charge, present false evidence and the victim has no recourse.

[8] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) Held: Title 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1976 ed., Supp. V) does not authorize a convicted state defendant to assert a claim for damages against a police officer for giving perjured testimony at the defendant's criminal trial. Pp. 460 U. S. 329-346.  A police officer can perjure himself to convict and the victim has no recourse for damages.

[9] Right of redress as assured by the 1^st Amendment Congress shall make no law… abridging… the right of the people…to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

[10] See The Commentaries on the 18th-century common law of England (and thus America) by Sir William Blackstone, originally published by the Clarendon Press at Oxford, 1765-1769.  Specifically Sir William Blackstone (1723 –1780) as quoted in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 1 Cranch 137 (1803) @ Page 5 U. S. 163  “Blackstone states… it is a general and indisputable rule that where there is a legal right, there is also a legal remedy by suit or action at law whenever that right is invaded.”

[11] Title 18 § 242. Criminal Deprivation of rights under color of law

[12] Title 42 § 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights

[13] A Petition for a Writ of Certiorari, Jeep v United States of America “Opposed to Immunity” currently on file in the Supreme Court clerk’s office, 8^th District Court of appeals Appeal: 10-1947, U.S. Federal Court Eastern District of Missouri Case No. Case 4:10-CV-101-TCM -- State Court Case No.: 03FC-10670M, Missouri Court of Appeals eastern District ED84021, U.S. District Court Eastern District of Missouri Jeep v. Jones et al, 4:07-cv-01116-CEJ, 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 07-2614, Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115 & State Court Case # CR203-1336M, Missouri Court of Appeals Southern District SD26269, U.S. District Court Western District of Missouri 07-0506-CV-W-SOW Jeep v Bennett, et al, 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 08-1823 (http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/).

Charges are Dismissed without Prejudice for failure to comply with the Speedy Trial Act

Charges are Dismissed without Prejudice for failure to comply with the Speedy Trial Act  (Case #4:09-cr-00659-CDP).

This in effect denies me my day in court and relieves the Federal Government of any liability, although I am disputing the denial of liability.

 

This was a violation of my Civil Rights per the US Supreme Court, UnitedStates of America, Appellee, v. Russell Kelner, Appellant, United States Court ofAppeals, Second Circuit. - 534 F.2d 1020 Argued Oct. 29, 1975.Decided April 9, 1976, “The purpose and effect of the Watts constitutionally-limited definition of the term "threat" is to insure that only unequivocal, unconditional and specific expressions of intention immediately to inflict injury may be punished only such threats, in short, as are of the same nature as those threats which are, as Judge Wright recognizes, "properly punished every day under statutes prohibiting extortion, blackmail and assault without consideration of First Amendment issues." Watts v. United States, 394 U.S. 705 (1969), supra. The Watts requirement of proof of a "true threat," it may be seen, works ultimately to much the same purpose and effect as would a requirement of proof of specific intent to execute the threat because both requirements focus on threats which are so unambiguous and have such immediacy that they convincingly express an intention of being carried out.”

 

I spent 411 day in federal custody denied my liberty and basic human rights, subject to the humiliation and intimidation of County Jail incarceration.

 

I was released in the dark of night 24 miles from the site where I had been arrested in homeless shelter on to the streets of down town St. Charles Missouri in the rain, penniless and wearing prison clothing

Mr. President we have a problem 

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

I had requested “the Protection of the Law” per my Civil Rights via a quote from the FBI Mission Statement (Charged as Case #4:09-cr-00659-CDP):

“The FBI is the lead agency for investigating violations of federal civil rights laws…and we take that responsibility seriously.” The FBI speaks specifically to these issues as they define their mission as it relates to civil rights “under color of law”. I again quote “U.S. law enforcement officers and other officials like judges, prosecutors, and security guards have been given tremendous power by local, state, and federal government agencies—authority they must have to enforce the law and ensure justice in our country. These powers include the authority to detain and arrest suspects, to search and seize property, to bring criminal charges, to make rulings in court, and to use deadly force in certain situations.

Preventing abuse of this authority, however, is equally necessary to the health of our nation’s democracy. That’s why it’s a federal crime for anyone acting under “color of law” willfully to deprive or conspire to deprive a person of a right protected by the Constitution or U.S. law. (bolding added) “Color of law” simply means that the person is using authority given to him or her by a local, state, or federal government agency.”

I was charged under:

18 U.S.C. § 2 provides:

(a) Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal.

(b) Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed by him or another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as a principal.

18 U.S.C. § 875(c) provides:

Whoever transmits in interstate commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

This was a violation of my Civil Rights per the US Supreme Court, United States of America, Appellee, v. Russell Kelner, Appellant, United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. - 534 F.2d 1020 Argued Oct. 29, 1975.Decided April 9, 1976, “The purpose and effect of the Watts constitutionally-limited definition of the term "threat" is to insure that only unequivocal, unconditional and specific expressions of intention immediately to inflict injury may be punished only such threats, in short, as are of the same nature as those threats which are, as Judge Wright recognizes, "properly punished every day under statutes prohibiting extortion, blackmail and assault without consideration of First Amendment issues." Watts v. United States, 394 U.S. 705 (1969), supra. The Watts requirement of proof of a "true threat," it may be seen, works ultimately to much the same purpose and effect as would a requirement of proof of specific intent to execute the threat because both requirements focus on threats which are so unambiguous and have such immediacy that they convincingly express an intention of being carried out.”

I spent 411 day in federal custody denied my liberty and basic human rights, subject to the humiliation and intimidation of County Jail incarceration. 

I was released in the dark of night 24 miles from the site wear I had been arrested in homeless shelter on to the streets of down town St. Charles Missouri in the rain, penniless and wearing prison clothing 

What I wrote, A SAMPLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A Card-Carrying Pacifist

A Card-Carrying Pacifist
First published February 10, 2009

http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2009/02/card-carrying-pacifist.html

Why did Cookie snap? What did Cookie do, he had struggled and worked to own his own home. He had struggled and worked the American Dream to own his own business.

http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2009/03/you-do-not-want-this-to-become-crazy.html

Civil Rights and Judicial Terrorism

http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2009/02/civil-rights-and-judicial-terrorism.html

To the FBI, A Demand for an affirmative response on or before March 16, 2009

http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2009/03/to-fbi-demand-for-affirmative-response.html

Why did Cookie snap? What did Cookie do, he had struggled and worked to own his own home. He had struggled and worked the American Dream to own his own business.

Sunday, March 08, 2009

Mike Christian at 314-280-5222 FBI Report

FBI St. Louis

2222 Market Street

St. Louis, Missouri 63103-2516

Phone: (314) 231-4324

Phone: (314) 589-2500, Fax: (314) 589-2636

E-mail: stlouis@ic.fbi.gov

Re: You do not want this to become a Crazy Macho Thing

Your deadline is still Monday March 16, 2009

Dear Mr. Christian,

This is not a spur of the moment DEMAND. I have been at this since Day One, some five plus years ago. This is not about my power v. your power. This is not even about the Rule of Law v. Tyranny and Terrorism. The issue is all about a remedy for a wrong. The rest is just rhetoric to make the right and the wrong more distinguishable.

“Every wrong shall have a remedy”, is a principle of common law that dates back King Henry II of England in the 12th Century. I am demanding my constitutional rights and a remedy for a wrong.

THE WRONG, the undisputed, undisputable RECORD of

THE WRONG

1. The police in Osage Beach, Missouri were incompetent to make the original arrest. They actually testified to their incompetence, of course at the time nobody believed them incompetent, they were believed to be law enforcement professionals, under color of law. On the stand under oath, they knowingly gave false incompetent information as factual evidence to establish police procedure, under color of law. They were wearing uniforms and badges, carrying guns; anybody and everybody could see they were the LAW. And as Professional Law Officers, they had sworn on the stand in front of the judge and the jury to tell “the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help me God”. Incompetence or perjury , it does not make any difference in a civil rights case. But you tell me, did Bill Clinton have sexual relations with that woman? (08-1823)

2. Judge Bennett had no credible legal or constitutional reason to put me in jail at the preliminary hearing in Camden County; it was illegal and unconstitutional Judicial Terrorism . (08-1823)

3. Judge Goeke issued a blatantly deficient, illegal and unconstitutional Court Order in effect taking my Son, my home, all my worldly possessions putting me on the street, HOMELESS; it was illegal and unconstitutional Judicial Terrorism . (07-11115)

4. Commissioner Jones, the would be Judge, forced me illegally and unconstitutionally into a Court Room and “held (me) to answer” his yet to be “adduced” surprise specifics, charges and Judgment; it was illegal and unconstitutional Judicial Terrorism . (07-11115)

5. Judge Colyer denied my valid pretrial motions for dismissal based on the gross incompetents of the arresting officers: it was illegal and unconstitutional Judicial Terrorism . (08-1823)

6. The Prosecuting Attorneys with acquiescence of Judge Colyer denied me exculpable material that would have proved the gross incompetents of the arresting officers; it was illegal and unconstitutional Judicial Terrorism . (08-1823)

7. The arresting officer Mr. Alex Little, Officer Badge #920 lied on the stand perjuring himself by contradicting verifiable police procedure. Officer Little had clearly been made aware of the issue by his intimate knowledge of the pretrial motions for the trial, he was in the courtroom to testify when I made the motion months before the testimony. Additionally he had testified that he had been to the certified training. Incompetence or perjury , it does not make any difference in a civil rights case. But you tell me, did Bill Clinton have sexual relations with that woman? (08-1823)

8. The second arresting officer Mr. Tim Taylor Officer Badge #913,not only testified to his incompetence, but further perjured himself on the stand under oath contradicting his prior sworn police report. Incompetence or perjury , it does not make any difference in a civil rights case. But you tell me, did Bill Clinton have sexual relations with that woman? (08-1823)

9. Judge Colyer and others acting in a conspiracy after the false and illegal conviction and with the full knowledge of all the above issues in a POST TRIAL MOTION, i.e. false arrest, malicious prosecution, false testimony, denial of exculpable material denied my POST TRIAL MOTION for a miss trial and forced me into an appeal that I was unable to mount for reasons other than the evidence above. I had a life outside of the courtroom; I was going through a contested divorce and had been illegally and unconstitutionally forced from my home and my SON, in a related issues, i.e. Writ of Certiorari 07-11115; it was illegal and unconstitutional Judicial Terrorism. (08-1823)

10. Because of the combined issues of the Writ of Certiorari 07-11115 and the appeal 08-1823 and because I am a human and not a superhuman I was unable to mount a perfected appeal in state Court on any of these issues, while working 60 hours a week, managing 145 men, on two shifts, 6 days a week on a construction project building at the rate of $5,000,000/month, this, thus became a Civil Rights Issue in FEDERAL COURT, a violation of Title 18 § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law and Title 42 § 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights,

THE WRONG.

What did I do wrong?

I was driving down the road and a self professed incompetent rookie police officer wanted to make, what he thought to be a BIG arrest, I was unfortunately the closest first victim that innocently came within striking distance. Even the probable cause is specious, having to use the right hand blinker in the midst of a left turn? Is that even possible?

I was sitting at home watching Monday Night Football my now ex-wife knowingly filed a bogus, legally deficient ex-parte order of protection ordered without legal or constitutional basis by a Judicial Terrorist; she knew she could get away with it because everybody does it.

I have been at this over five years, I know it would be easier for you easier for the FBI, easier for the Supreme court if I just went away. That AIN’T GONNA HAPPEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Am I going to break, I am going to snap like Cookie?

IT IS A POSSIBILITY!!!!!!!!!

Why did Cookie snap? What did Cookie do, he had struggled and worked to own his own home. He had struggled and worked the American Dream to own his own business. Cookie owned what for him was a glorious piece of property, it was his home, his pride and joy, in a town he had grown up in, a place he had prospered in, a place where he had always felt safe, a place he had hoped to raise a family in, a place where he new the RULES.

Somebody came into his hometown, his home, with guns, traffic tickets, and New RULES . The New RULES told him, you can not live here, as you have ALWAYS LIVED here… for YOUR ENTIRE LIFE, this is no longer your home. You have to now be like US or move!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now Cookie did not have the education, the patience, or the will that I have. He had the intelligence, he was a smart guy. He had the work ethic, he was a small business owner, a hard worker. He fought as best he could; I am sure he put up a good fight. I am sure he did all that he could to defend his home, defend his business, defend his hopes for the future, defend his rights for the benefit of his son. I knew Cookie, he had a good heart, a good soul, I feel confident that he had grown into a good man, I knew his mother.

I am sure that if there was someone with the truth and the courage to tell it, his Son could be and should be proud of him. Proud of the life he had built, Proud of the fight he put up. Proud of the courage he showed as a peaceful businessman, struggling fighting all those traffic tickets just to keep his home, his business, his life for his son. It is too bad the way it ended, a Crazy Macho thing.

I am sure Cookie has affected to some extent, if only subconsciously, the current RE-THINKING of eminent domain / zoning and it’s uses for commercial, non-imperative, NON-governmental uses. The use of “eminent domain” for non-imperative commercial purposes is currently being reconsidered with commercial interests going belly up before completing the projects. Should we have listen closer to Cookie?

You do not want to run the risk of this becoming a Crazy Macho thing. That would not be politically or legally SMART. I do not have to tell ANY of you LAW ENFORCEMENT officers, you push a man to extremes illegally, you have responsibility for his actions . I am legally demanding my rights. That is the difference between a privilege and a right. You can DEMAND your rights. A privilege you have to ask nice for, may I please. You need to teach Dan Bracco (FBI) that.

We have a Bill of Rights in this country. It is a part of our Constitution and enforceable throughout the land as THE rule of law. I am demanding my civil RIGHTS as declared in the Bill of Rights, specifically the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments. The FBI is responsible for enforcing our CIVIL RIGHTS as defined by the Bill of Rights, U.S. Constitution and Laws. You need to teach Dan Bracco (FBI) that.

That aside, I have been asking, nicely, for my rights for FIVE YEARS!!!!!!!! When does an illegal refusal become illegal extremes, I am through asking. I am demanding my “rights…secured by the Constitution and laws ”. Do not even begin to think about immunity, there is no such thing as immunity from the rule of LAW. Specifically I want the protection of the civil right’s laws as passed in 1871 and as now codified into the United States Code of law as Title 18 § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law and Title 42 § 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights. Title 18 § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law and Title 42 § 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights were written and made into law to enforce “We the People’s” rights on those acting “under color of law”. That is what Civil rights enforcement is all about, I quote from FBI Mission Statement “The FBI is the lead agency for investigating violations of federal civil rights laws…and we take that responsibility seriously. ” The FBI speaks specifically to these issues as they define their mission as it relates to civil rights “under color of law”. I again quote “U.S. law enforcement officers and other officials like judges, prosecutors, and security guards have been given tremendous power by local, state, and federal government agencies—authority they must have to enforce the law and ensure justice in our country. These powers include the authority to detain and arrest suspects, to search and seize property, to bring criminal charges, to make rulings in court, and to use deadly force in certain situations.

Preventing abuse of this authority, however, is equally necessary to the health of our nation’s democracy. That’s why it’s a federal crime for anyone acting under “color of law” willfully to deprive or conspire to deprive a person of a right protected by the Constitution or U.S. law. (bolding added) “Color of law” simply means that the person is using authority given to him or her by a local, state, or federal government agency. ” You need to teach Dan Bracco (FBI) that.

This is about FEDERAL Constitutional Civil Rights yes.

But more importantly it is about the rights of a Father and SON. I refuse to be the sperm donor and the source of Child Support DOLLARS.

I have a SON; I will be his FATHER!!!!!!

I will never give up, I will NEVER GIVE IN!!!!!!!!!!

No REAL FATHER EVER WOULD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You do not want this to become a Crazy Macho Thing. Let’s all be civilized. Lets all work for the Rule of Law, the rights of “We the People”. I am not asking for a lot, Judges that are constrained by the Bill of Rights, competent police officers, the truth AND the “rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws ”.

My world / Cookies’ world, I am a card carrying pacifist. I was raised in a different world from most. My world was nothing like Cookies. I was white upper middle class. I had the BEST, schools, opportunity and Rights. Cookie did not have the same schools, opportunity and Rights as I did, it was a long time ago, he was African American.

We didn’t have to fight for our supper; we did it for FUN. We would go at each other with a level of proficiency, ability and intensity that would literally terrify most people. We did it for FUN. We are not talking about just the physical sports, we are talking mental games of lust and avarice. I was the youngest of three boys in a privileged neighborhood and privileged school.

But we were civilized, I could break your leg on the field, win the girl and get paid for doing it. Then slap you on the back with a smile and say jokingly “wasn’t that fun”. And you would very civilly take it and BE BETTER next time. That was my world. It was as cut throat as any ghetto I assure you.

I use to be afraid of myself. I use to have a hair trigger, but time and experience gave me discipline and control. I learned to walk away from violence and a lot other things. I learned to live a lot more civil life. I know people that live that way still, always ON, always read to go for the jugular. I am NO longer like that, I am normally a very happy go lucky kind of guy, ask anybody.

You do not want to break me away from my civility and my civil rights. There are no holds barred in that kind of fight. I would go dark and you would never see me, but there would be CONSEQUENCES. And the consequences would be beyond the imagination of anybody constrained by civility and the civil rights of others. I am not threatening anything; I do not even want to think about that. Nobody in their right mind wants to think about that. You can back any person into a corner where his or her only option is fight or flight.

You do not want this to become a Crazy Macho Thing

I do not even want to think about an old friend walking into City Hall and shooting people indiscriminately until he was shot and killed himself. He knew exactly what he was doing; in modern parlance, it was “suicide by cop”.

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

Thank you in advance

Time is always of the essence,

Dave@DGJeep.com

David G. Jeep

David G. Jeep

cc: a select group of favorites

file

You do not want this to become a Crazy Macho Thing, Your deadline is still Monday March 16, 2009

Friday, March 06, 2009

Mike Christian at 314-280-5222 FBI Report

FBI St. Louis

2222 Market Street

St. Louis, Missouri 63103-2516

Phone: (314) 231-4324

Phone: (314) 589-2500, Fax: (314) 589-2636

E-mail: stlouis@ic.fbi.gov

Re: You do not want this to become a Crazy Macho Thing

Your deadline is still Monday March 16, 2009

Dear Mr. Christian,

This is not a spur of the moment DEMAND. I have been at this since Day One, some five plus years ago. This is not about my power v. your power. This is not even about the Rule of Law v. Tyranny and Terrorism. The issue is all about a remedy for a wrong. The rest is just rhetoric to make the right and the wrong more distinguishable.

“Every wrong shall have a remedy”, is a principle of common law that dates back King Henry II of England in the 12th Century. I am demanding my constitutional rights and a remedy for a wrong.

THE WRONG, the undisputed, undisputable RECORD of

THE WRONG

1. The police in Osage Beach, Missouri were incompetent to make the original arrest. They actually testified to their incompetence, of course at the time nobody believed them incompetent, they were believed to be law enforcement professionals, under color of law. On the stand under oath, they knowingly gave false incompetent information as factual evidence to establish police procedure, under color of law. They were wearing uniforms and badges, carrying guns; anybody and everybody could see they were the LAW. And as Professional Law Officers, they had sworn on the stand in front of the judge and the jury to tell “the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help me God”. Incompetence[1] or perjury[2], it does not make any difference in a civil rights case. But you tell me, did Bill Clinton have sexual relations with that woman? (08-1823)

2. Judge Bennett had no credible legal or constitutional reason to put me in jail at the preliminary hearing in Camden County; it was illegal and unconstitutional Judicial Terrorism[3]. (08-1823)

3. Judge Goeke issued a blatantly deficient, illegal and unconstitutional Court Order in effect taking my Son, my home, all my worldly possessions putting me on the street, HOMELESS; it was illegal and unconstitutional Judicial Terrorism[4]. (07-11115)

4. Commissioner Jones, the would be Judge, forced me illegally and unconstitutionally into a Court Room and “held (me) to answer” his yet to be “adduced” surprise specifics, charges and Judgment; it was illegal and unconstitutional Judicial Terrorism[5]. (07-11115)

5. Judge Colyer denied my valid pretrial motions for dismissal based on the gross incompetents of the arresting officers: it was illegal and unconstitutional Judicial Terrorism[6]. (08-1823)

6. The Prosecuting Attorneys with acquiescence of Judge Colyer denied me exculpable material[7] that would have proved the gross incompetents of the arresting officers; it was illegal and unconstitutional Judicial Terrorism[8]. (08-1823)

7. The arresting officer Mr. Alex Little, Officer Badge #920 lied on the stand perjuring himself by contradicting verifiable police procedure. Officer Little had clearly been made aware of the issue by his intimate knowledge of the pretrial motions for the trial, he was in the courtroom to testify when I made the motion months before the testimony. Additionally he had testified that he had been to the certified training. Incompetence[9] or perjury[10], it does not make any difference in a civil rights case. But you tell me, did Bill Clinton have sexual relations with that woman? (08-1823)

8. The second arresting officer Mr. Tim Taylor Officer Badge #913,not only testified to his incompetence, but further perjured himself on the stand under oath contradicting his prior sworn police report. Incompetence[11] or perjury[12], it does not make any difference in a civil rights case. But you tell me, did Bill Clinton have sexual relations with that woman? (08-1823)

9. Judge Colyer and others acting in a conspiracy after the false and illegal conviction and with the full knowledge of all the above issues in a POST TRIAL MOTION, i.e. false arrest, malicious prosecution, false testimony, denial of exculpable material denied my POST TRIAL MOTION for a miss trial and forced me into an appeal that I was unable to mount for reasons other than the evidence above. I had a life outside of the courtroom; I was going through a contested divorce and had been illegally and unconstitutionally forced from my home and my SON, in a related issues, i.e. Writ of Certiorari 07-11115; it was illegal and unconstitutional Judicial Terrorism. (08-1823)

10. Because of the combined issues of the Writ of Certiorari 07-11115 and the appeal 08-1823 and because I am a human and not a superhuman I was unable to mount a perfected appeal in state Court on any of these issues, while working 60 hours a week, managing 145 men, on two shifts, 6 days a week on a construction project building at the rate of $5,000,000/month, this, thus became a Civil Rights Issue in FEDERAL COURT, a violation of Title 18 § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law and Title 42 § 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights, the wrong.

What did I do wrong?

I was driving down the road and a self professed incompetent rookie police officer wanted to make, what he thought to be a BIG arrest, I was unfortunately the closest first victim that innocently came within striking distance. Even the probable cause is specious, having to use the right hand blinker in the midst of a left turn? Is that even possible?

I was sitting at home watching Monday Night Football my now ex-wife[13] knowingly filed a bogus, legally deficient ex-parte order of protection ordered without legal or constitutional basis by a Judicial Terrorist; she knew she could get away with it because everybody does it.

I have been at this over five years, I know it would be easier for you easier for the FBI, easier for the Supreme court if I just went away. That AIN’T GONNA HAPPEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Am I going to break, I am going to snap like Cookie?

IT IS A POSSIBILITY!!!!!!!!!

Why did Cookie snap? What did Cookie do, he had struggled and worked to own his own home. He had struggled and worked the American Dream to own his own business. Cookie owned what for him was a glorious piece of property, it was his home, his pride and joy, in a town he had grown up in, a place he had prospered in, a place where he had always felt safe, a place he had hoped to raise a family in, a place where he new the RULES.

Somebody came into his hometown, his home, with guns, traffic tickets, and New RULES[14]. The New RULES told him, you can not live here, as you have ALWAYS LIVED here… for YOUR ENTIRE LIFE, this is no longer your home. You have to now be like US or move!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now Cookie did not have the education, the patience, or the will that I have. He had the intelligence, he was a smart guy. He had the work ethic, he was a small business owner, a hard worker. He fought as best he could; I am sure he put up a good fight. I am sure he did all that he could to defend his home, defend his business, defend his hopes for the future, defend his rights for the benefit of his son. I knew Cookie, he had a good heart, a good soul, I feel confident that he had grown into a good man, I knew his mother.

I am sure that if there was someone with the truth and the courage to tell it, his Son could be and should be proud of him. Proud of the life he had built, Proud of the fight he put up. Proud of the courage he showed as a peaceful businessman, struggling fighting all those traffic tickets just to keep his home, his business, his life for his son. It is too bad the way it ended, a Crazy Macho thing.

I am sure Cookie has affected to some extent, if only subconsciously, the current RE-THINKING of eminent domain / zoning and it’s uses for commercial, non-imperative, NON-governmental uses. The use of “eminent domain” for non-imperative commercial purposes is currently being reconsidered with commercial interests going belly up before completing the projects. Should we have listen closer to Cookie?

You do not want to run the risk of this becoming a Crazy Macho thing. That would not be politically or legally SMART. I do not have to tell ANY of you LAW ENFORCEMENT officers, you push a man to extremes illegally, you have responsibility for his actions[15]. I am legally demanding my rights. That is the difference between a privilege and a right. You can DEMAND your rights. A privilege you have to ask nice for, may I please. You need to teach Dan Bracco (FBI) that.

We have a Bill of Rights in this country. It is a part of our Constitution and enforceable throughout the land as THE rule of law. I am demanding my civil RIGHTS as declared in the Bill of Rights, specifically the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments. The FBI is responsible for enforcing our CIVIL RIGHTS as defined by the Bill of Rights, U.S. Constitution and Laws. You need to teach Dan Bracco (FBI) that.

That aside, I have been asking, nicely, for my rights for FIVE YEARS!!!!!!!! When does an illegal refusal become illegal extremes, I am through asking. I am demanding my “rights…secured by the Constitution and laws[16]”. Do not even begin to think about immunity, there is no such thing as immunity from the rule of LAW. Specifically I want the protection of the civil right’s laws as passed in 1871 and as now codified into the United States Code of law as Title 18 § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law and Title 42 § 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights. Title 18 § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law and Title 42 § 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights were written and made into law to enforce “We the People’s” rights on those acting “under color of law”. That is what Civil rights enforcement is all about, I quote from FBI Mission Statement “The FBI is the lead agency for investigating violations of federal civil rights laws…and we take that responsibility seriously.[17]” The FBI speaks specifically to these issues as they define their mission as it relates to civil rights “under color of law”. I again quote “U.S. law enforcement officers and other officials like judges, prosecutors, and security guards have been given tremendous power by local, state, and federal government agencies—authority they must have to enforce the law and ensure justice in our country. These powers include the authority to detain and arrest suspects, to search and seize property, to bring criminal charges, to make rulings in court, and to use deadly force in certain situations.

Preventing abuse of this authority, however, is equally necessary to the health of our nation’s democracy. That’s why it’s a federal crime for anyone acting under “color of law” willfully to deprive or conspire to deprive a person of a right protected by the Constitution or U.S.. law. (bolding added) “Color of law” simply means that the person is using authority given to him or her by a local, state, or federal government agency.[18]” You need to teach Dan Bracco (FBI) that.

This is about FEDERAL Constitutional Civil Rights yes.

But more importantly it is about the rights of a Father and SON. I refuse to be the sperm donor and the source of Child Support DOLLARS.

I have a SON; I will be his FATHER!!!!!!

I will never give up, I will NEVER GIVE IN!!!!!!!!!!

No REAL FATHER EVER WOULD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You do not want this to become a Crazy Macho Thing. Let’s all be civilized. Lets all work for the Rule of Law, the rights of “We the People”. I am not asking for a lot, Judges that are constrained by the Bill of Rights, competent police officers, the truth AND the “rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws[19]”.

My world / Cookies’ world, I am a card carrying pacifist. I was raised in a different world from most. My world was nothing like Cookies. I was white upper middle class. I had the BEST, schools, opportunity and Rights. Cookie did not have the same schools, opportunity and Rights as I did, it was a long time ago, he was African American.

We didn’t have to fight for our supper; we did it for FUN. We would go at each other with a level of proficiency, ability and intensity that would literally terrify most people. We did it for FUN. We are not talking about just the physical sports, we are talking mental games of lust and avarice. I was the youngest of three boys in a privileged neighborhood and privileged school.

But we were civilized, I could break your leg on the field, win the girl and get paid for doing it. Then slap you on the back with a smile and say jokingly “wasn’t that fun”. And you would very civilly take it and BE BETTER next time. That was my world. It was as cut throat as any ghetto I assure you.

I use to be afraid of myself. I use to have a hair trigger, but time and experience gave me discipline and control. I learned to walk away from violence and a lot other things. I learned to live a lot more civil life. I know people that live that way still, always ON, always read to go for the jugular. I am NO longer like that, I am normally a very happy go lucky kind of guy, ask anybody.

You do not want to break me away from my civility and my civil rights. There are no holds barred in that kind of fight. I would go dark and you would never see me, but there would be CONSEQUENCES. And the consequences would be beyond the imagination of anybody constrained by civility and the civil rights of others. I am not threatening anything; I do not even want to think about that. Nobody in their right mind wants to think about that. You can back any person into a corner where his or her only option is fight or flight.

You do not want this to become a Crazy Macho Thing

I do not even want to think about an old friend walking into City Hall and shooting people indiscriminately until he was shot and killed himself. He knew exactly what he was doing; in modern parlance, it was “suicide by cop”.

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

Thank you in advance

Time is always of the essence,

David G. Jeep

cc: a select group of favorites

file

[1] Owen v City of Independence (455 U.S. 622 (1980) "A Good Faith effort is not Enough"(FN 20 & Pages 21)

[2] Amendment V and VI United States Constitution compulsory testifying requires compulsory “truth telling”

[3] The Fourth Amendment provides that "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated. . . ."

[4] The Fourth Amendment provides that "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated. . . ."

[5] The Fourth Amendment provides that "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated. . . ."

[6] The Fourteenth Amendment asserts Due Process of Law as a requisite for any and all deprivations. This motion was without a valid reason for denial

[7]Jean v. Collins 221 F.3d 656, 659 (4th Cir. 200) cert. denied 531 U.S. 1076 121 S.Ct. 771, 148 L.ed.2d 671 (2001), "Due Process, Right to Exculpatory, Brady Material" (FN 17, 25, 26 & Pages 19, 26, 27)

[8] The Fourteenth Amendment asserts Due Process of Law as a requisite for any and all deprivations. This motion was without a valid reason for denial

[9] Owen v City of Independence (455 U.S. 622 (1980) "A Good Faith effort is not Enough"(FN 20 & Pages 21)

[10] Amendment V and VI United States Constitution compulsory testifying requires compulsory “truth telling”

[11] Owen v City of Independence (455 U.S. 622 (1980) "A Good Faith effort is not Enough"(FN 20 & Pages 21)

[12] Amendment V and VI United States Constitution compulsory testifying requires compulsory “truth telling”

[13] Ex-wife is a civilized description, I do not want to be any where near her and or even be forced to touch her with a ten foot pole.

[14] If memory serves the use of “eminent domain” for a commercial purposes was first used in Meacham Park. The use of “eminent domain” for commercial purposes is currently being reconsidered with commercial interests going belly up before completing the projects. Should we have listen closer to Cookie?

[15] Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971)

[16]Title 18 § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law and Title 42 § 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights.

[17] http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cid/civilrights/civilrts.htm

[18] http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cid/civilrights/color.htm

[19] Title 18 § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law and Title 42 § 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights.

Thanks in advance,

"Time is of the essence".

David G. Jeep

Dave@DGJeep.com

DGJeep@DGJeep.com