Showing posts with label PWC 13-7030. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PWC 13-7030. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 5, 2014

We are now looking at whether you and the courts are in THE POSSESSION OF MORAL AGENCY?

President Barack Hussein Obama                    Ruth Bader Ginsburg
The White House                                             Supreme Court of the United States
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.                    One First Street N.E.
Washington, DC 20500-0001                             Washington, DC 20543-0001

Re: Petition for Writ of Certiorari 14-5551 David Jeep v. Government of United States - that "a four-year-old[1]" could understand
 Dear People,

 "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity."
Martin Luther King "Strength to Love" 1963[2]

As you may or may not know, I have written you both SEVERAL TIMES!!!  I was served a NOT "facially valid court order."[3]  Now both of you, The Supreme Court en banc, the Federal Court Eastern District of Missouri and 8th Circuit Court are all asserting "sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." [4]

In the Jane Crow era we have thus gone beyond whether men or woman are in THE POSSESSION OF greater MORAL AGENCY.[5]  We are now looking at whether you and the courts are in THE POSSESSION OF MORAL AGENCY?  Or are you and they too sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid"[6] "to establish justice" in the face of nearly 150 years of a criminally[7] fraudulent[8] self-serving Black Robed Royalist Judiciary's unconstitutional fiat legislation.[9]

It has been 146 years since the unconstitutional Black Robed Royalist Judiciary in Randall v. Brigham, 74 U.S. 536 (1868) reached back in time to a discredited[10] court, Star Chamber, to create "absolute immunity" to render "absolute power" for the institutionalization of Jim Crow, now Jane Crow, inequality over the expressed constitutional congressional "ex industria, power to enforce the Thirteenth (Fourteenth and Fifteenth) Amendment by appropriate legislation"[11] - MANDATES in the Civil rights Act of 1866,[12] Civil rights Act of 1871[13] and the Civil rights Act of 1875.[14] 

I have been impoverished by my 11.17 years[15] effort, I have been homeless for over 6.7[16] years, I have been through the Federal District and Circuit courts 9 times and to the Supreme Court of the United States 5 times.  I was arrested by FBI and spent 411 days in jail before the charges were dismissed for failure to prosecute.  While in jail, I submitted to TWO psychiatric exams - both confirming my SANITY and my COMPETENCY!!!!  I doubt the all powerful absolutely immune Judiciary could, en masse, say the same.

I stress, as always, "time is of the essence."  I was, I say again, incarcerated for 411 days[17] and have been homeless for 6.70 years in this 11.17 year effort. [18] 


"How[19] did strict scrutiny[20] for inalienable reckonable[21] rights[22] ever result[23] in anything less than STRICT LIABILITY?[24]"


We have gone PAST Thomas Jefferson's assertions of destruction:

"The germ of destruction of our nation is in the power of the judiciary, an irresponsible body - working like gravity by night and day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing it's noiseless step like a thief over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall render powerless the checks of one branch over the other and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated." --Thomas Jefferson[25]

to render ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION[26] of inalienable rights under color of law.


To hear the Supreme Court tell us, via their unrestricted absolutely immune, fraud based, power, We the People, all evidence to the contrary, "intended sub silentio"[27] to traded the "King[28] can do no WRONG" for the ABSOLUTELY IMMUNE actions of the "malicious or corrupt" judges (Bradley v. Fisher, supra, 80 U. S. 335, 80 U. S. 349, note, at 80 U. S. 350, Pierson v. Ray, 386 U. S. 57 (1967) Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978)),[29] the "malicious or dishonest" prosecutor Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976), [30] the "knowingly false testimony by police officers" (Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983)),[31] corrupt, malicious, dishonest, sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid[32] actions[33] of federal, state, local, and regional legislators (Bogan v. Scott-Harris - 523 U.S. 44 (1997) Tenney v. Brandhove, 341 U. S. 367, 372, 372-376; Amy v. Supervisors, 11 Wall. 136, 138)[34] and the malicious, corrupt, dishonest, sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid[35] actions of "all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who (spouses) were integral parts of the judicial process" (Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983)) [36] acting under color of law to render ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION[37] of inalienable rights under color of law.

In this 11.17 year effort, 411 days[38] incarcerated, 6.70 years homeless, and 5 trips to the Supreme Court of the United States I have left no proverbial or real life "stone unturned."  Leave this petition undefended and the CORRUPTION leaves only one means to establish Justice in a country supposedly based on reasonable "due process of law."

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 - Tuesday, August 05, 2014, 1:30:27 PM



[1] Attorney Joe Miller (Denzel Washington REPEATED ASSERTION in "Philadelphia"): "Now, explain it to me like I'm a four-year-old"
[2] Martin Luther King "Strength to Love" 1963
[3] The assertion of a misdemeanor traffic violation does not provide probable cause for an ex parte restraining order.  Clearly based on the original SERVED handwritten petition dated 11-03-03 as provided with the 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). 
[4] Martin Luther King "Strength to Love" 1963
[5] "Do the four of you, or do I, have more confidence in what feminism once valuably asserted – the fact that women are the equals of men in the possession of moral agency?"  George F. will's response to Senators Blumenthal, Feinstein, Baldwin and Casey, June 13, 2014.  Re: "Colleges mad with political correctness over campus rapes" By George F. Will, New York Post, June 7, 2014 – "Colleges become the victims of progressivism" By George F. Will, Washington Post, Published: June 6
[6] Martin Luther King "Strength to Love" 1963
[7] This is criminal not only because of the Criminal Deprivation of rights (18 U.S.C. § 241 & 242), but also the CLEAR FRAUD in the face of the mens rea and actus reus, of 150 years of self-servingly asseted "sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." 
[8] Fraus omnia corrumpit "Fraud corrupts all." A principle according to which the discovery of fraud invalidates all aspects of a judicial decision
[9] As examples of the self-serving Black Robed Royalist Judiciary's unconstitutional fiat legislation, that has corrupted We the People's unalienable rights under color of law, I submit, Randall v. Brigham, 74 U.S. 7 (1868) the origin of judicial criminal sophisticated "absolute immunity," Bradley v. Fisher, 13 Wall. 335 (1872) origin of sophisticated Judicial civil "absolute immunity," Blyew v. United States, 80 U.S. 581 (1871) sophisticated "absolute immunity" for racially motivate mass murder, United States v. Reese, 92 U.S. 214 (1875) sophisticated deprivation of the 15th Amendment's Voting Rights protection with the subterfuges of poll taxes, literacy tests, and grandfather clauses, United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875) sophisticated "absolute immunity" for racially motivated massacre (Colfax Riot/pogrom), United States v. Harris, 106 U.S. 629 (1883) sophisticated "absolute immunity" for the state's sanctioned kidnapping, assault and murder without regard to the 14th Amendment's security, Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3 (1883) creating sophisticated racial segregation and the ongoing Jim Crow discrimination over the "necessary and proper" "Act to protect all citizens in their civil and legal rights." 18 Stat. 335, enacted March 1, 1875, Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896) separate and UNEQUAL, clarifying sophisticated segregation over the necessary and proper "Act to protect all citizens in their civil and legal rights." 18 Stat. 335, enacted March 1, 1875, Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967) reaffirmed Judicial sophisticated "absolute immunity," Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 409 (1976) prosecutorial sophisticated "absolute immunity," Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978) sophisticated "absolute immunity" for forced sterilization, and Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) sophisticated "absolute immunity" for "knowingly false testimony by police officers," and "all persons that were integral in the Judicial Process."   If that is not ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION of We the People's intent to establish justice, I cannot imagine what is.
[10] The star chamber was abolished for cause, abuse of said absolute immunity with the Act of Parliament "Abolition of the Star Chamber" (July 5, 1641)
[11] MR. JUSTICE HARLAN dissenting. Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 32 (1883)
[12] Now Codified into US Code as Criminal 18 U.S.C. § 241 & 242
[13] Now Codified into US Code as Civil 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 1985
[14] Now Codified into US Code as The Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Pub.L. 88–352, 78 Stat. 241, enacted July 2, 1964)
[15] Start Saturday May 17, 2003 01:00 AM as of Tuesday July 15 2014 12:58 PM
[16] Start Monday November 05, 2007 10:00 AM of Tuesday July 15 2014 12:58 PM
[17] U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis Case #4:09-cr-00659-CDP, Habeas Cases 4:09-CV-831 CAS, 4:09-MJ-1052 TIA, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit 09-2848  David Jeep  vs.  United States
[18] Start Saturday May 17, 2003 01:00 AM as of Tuesday July 15 2014 12:58 PM
[19] "We have long enough suffered under the base prostitution of law to party passions in one judge, and the imbecility of another. In the hands of one the law is nothing more than an ambiguous text, to be explained by his sophistry into any meaning which may subserve his personal malice." (The Letters of Thomas Jefferson: 1743-1826 SCHOOLS AND "LITTLE REPUBLICS" To John Tyler Monticello, May 26, 1810)
[20] United States v. Carolene Products (1938), Korematsu v. United States (1944), and Adarand Constructors v. Peña, 515 U.S. 200 (1995)
[21] "reckonability" is a needful characteristic of any law worthy of the name."  Antonin Scalia: The Rule of Law as a Law of Rules,  56 U. Chi. L. Rev. 1175, 1175-81 (1989)
[22] Due Process of Law under the 5th and 14th amendments
[23] Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 410 (1971) In a civil issue "the "exclusionary rule" is simply irrelevant…, it is damages or nothing."
[24] "As our precedent makes clear, proving that a municipality itself actually caused a constitutional violation by failing to train the offending employee presents "difficult problems of proof," and we must adhere to a "stringent standard of fault," lest municipal liability under §1983 collapse into respondeat superior.12 Bryan County, 520 U. S., at 406, 410; see Canton, 489 U. S., at 391–392." Connick, District Attorney, et al. v. Thompson, Certiorari to the Supreme Court, No. 09–571. Argued October 6, 2010—Decided March 29, 2011 - What happened to - "The essence of the constitutional right to equal 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 by a common carrier, under authority of the state, a facility or convenience which is furnished to another under substantially the same circumstances may properly complain that his constitutional privilege has been invaded." McCabe v. Atchison, T. & S.F. Ry. Co., 235 U.S. 151 (1914)
[25] As quoted into the Congressional Record Senate Vol. 152, Pt. 1 page 80-81, Mr. Santorum and Bergh, 15:331. 1821.
[26] "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority, still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it." Lord Acton in a letter he wrote to scholar and ecclesiastic Mandell Creighton, dated April 1887.
[27]  "To assume that Congress, which had enacted a criminal sanction directed against state judicial officials, [Footnote 2/26] intended sub silentio to exempt those same officials from the civil counterpart approaches the incredible. [Footnote 2/27]"  Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 363 (1983)  I would assert it a fantastic or delusional scenario!!!!!
[28] Judges e.g., "the Law will not suppose any unindifferent, when he is sworn to serve the King"
[29] Bradley v. Fisher, supra, 80 U. S. 335, 80 U. S. 349, note, at 80 U. S. 350, Pierson v. Ray, 386 U. S. 57 (1967) Judicial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY is based on a skewed reading, overlooking the noted exception that absolute ANYTHING creates, of Lord Coke, Floyd and Barker (1607) ruling from an acknowledged CORRUPT court, the Star Chamber.
[30] Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976) Prosecutorial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY
[32] "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." Martin Luther King "Strength to Love" 1963
[33] The recent Government Shut Down comes to mind, but the Black Robed Royalist Article III Supreme Court had already handed our legislators absolute immunity for their legislative actions, Bogan v. Scott-Harris - 523 U.S. 44 (1997).  --- See also David Gerard Jeep Appellant v. The Tea Party/GOP/Republicans, et al. Appellees U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis Case #: 13CV2089-DDN, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit No: 14-1344
[34] Bogan v. Scott-Harris - 523 U.S. 44 (1997) Tenney v. Brandhove, 341 U. S. 367, 372, 372-376; Amy v. Supervisors, 11 Wall. 136, 138
[35] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the gratuitous grants of dishonesty, malice and corruption.  Martin Luther King said it better, "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity" (MLK Jr., Strength to Love, 1963). 
As regards state Prosecutors, "States can discipline federal prosecutors, rarely do" 12/08/2010 USAToday by Brad Heath & Kevin McCoy ("Federal prosecutors series").  The "OPR is a black hole. Stuff goes in, nothing comes out," said Jim Lavine, the president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. "The public, the defense attorneys and the judiciary have lost respect for the government's ability to police themselves."
As regards law enforcement "Convicted defendants left uninformed of forensic flaws found by Justice Dept." By Spencer S. Hsu, The Washington Post published: April 16, 2012, The Washington Post reported on cases that demonstrate problems of COMPETENCY in forensic analysis that have been known for nearly 40 years by the Justice Department.
[36] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983) ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for "all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process"
[37] "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority, still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it." Lord Acton in a letter he wrote to scholar and ecclesiastic Mandell Creighton, dated April 1887.
[38] U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis Case #4:09-cr-00659-CDP, Habeas Cases 4:09-CV-831 CAS, 4:09-MJ-1052 TIA, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit 09-2848  David Jeep  vs.  United States
--
Thanks in advance,
To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process
"Agere sequitur esse"
"Time is  of the essence"
David G. Jeep
http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/
My E-mail addresses are David.G.Jeep@GMail.com orDGJeep01@yahoo.com

(314) 514-5228

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

Monday, July 21, 2014

Cover Letter Writ of Certiorari 14-1470 David Jeep v. Government of United States

First-Class Mail® - Certified Mail™ Label Number: 70132630000221180033
Expected Delivery Day: Thursday, July 24, 2014

Delivered, July 28, 2014 , 8:30 am, WASHINGTON, DC 20543


________________________________________________________________
Scott S. Harris, Clerk of the Court
Supreme Court of the United States
One First Street N.E.
Washington, DC 20543-0001

Re: A repeated constitutionally and lawfully un-abridge-able petition for Writ of Certiorari regarding the facially IN-valid court order[1] in the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals cases 07-261408-182310-194711-242512-2435, 13-2200 and 14-1470 David Jeep v. Government of United States that “a four-year-old[2]” could understand

Dear Mr. Harris,

I stress, as always, “Time is of the essence.”  I am impoverished and have been homeless for 6.70 years in this 11.17 year effort

“How did strict scrutiny for inalienable “reckonable” rights ever result in anything less than STRICT LIABILITY?”

“The germ of destruction of our nation is in the power of the judiciary, an irresponsible body - working like gravity by night and day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing it's noiseless step like a thief over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall render powerless the checks of one branch over the other and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated." --Thomas Jefferson

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

enclosure
a.     “A humble pro se  EMERGENCY PETITION for a WRIT OF CERTIORARI, 11.17 years  of deprivation, IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES”
b.     In forma pauperis petition in the Supreme Court

cc:  My Blog - Tuesday, October 15, 2013, 9:32:16 AM




[1] The assertion of a misdemeanor traffic violation does not provide probable cause for a ex parte restraining order.  Clearly based on the original SERVED handwritten petition dated 11-03-03 as provided hear, 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). 
[2] Attorney Joe Miller (Denzel Washington REPEATED ASSERTION in “Philadelphia”): Now, explain it to me like I'm a four-year-old.






Thursday, June 12, 2014

President Obama, STOP thinking exclusively as a father of two college bound young women to REMEMBER the degradation, unrestrained by Due Process of law, that the groundless racial and misandric Jim Crow era asserted - “African-American males could not be trusted around white Women.”

President Barack Hussein Obama          Label Number: 70132630000221180064
The White House                                    Expected Delivery Day, Monday, June 16, 2014
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.          Delivered 06/19/2014 4:24am WASHINGTON 
Washington, DC 20500-0001                          DC 20500

Re: CoEd Crow, GI Crow in the Jane Crow era - Jeep v. Government of the United States, et al 8th Federal Circuit Case No. 14-1470, Federal District Case No. 4:13-cv-02490-RWS[1]

Dear Mr. President,

I campaigned for you in 2007 and 2008.  I voted for you in 2008 and 2012.  I support the FUNDING of the universal assertions in The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), commonly called the Affordable Care Act (ACA) or Obamacare.  I support your considered, pacific, and inclusive international diplomacy.  I support your immigration reform.  I have spoken out against the "phony scandals" that the Tea Party / GOP / Republican Party have relentlessly and unwarrantedly attempted to disrespect you with. 

 "And, after boasting this way of my support, I come to the admission that it has a limit.  Conduct may be founded on the hard rock or the wet marshes, but after a certain point I don't care what it's founded on."

The REAL scandal is your continued refusal to support and defend the protection of the inalienable constitutional RIGHTS of We the PeopleI have been asking my government, and you as its executive, for my constitutional rights and protection of the laws since 2003.  Your assertions via misandric[2] new rules on college campuses, CoEd Crow,[3] and in the military, GI Crow,[4] regarding sexual assault are unacceptable under common and constitutional due process of law.  There is no Due Process when infamous unsupported accusations can TRUMP Due Process protection to unavoidable detriment of the individual. 

I ask you to STOP thinking exclusively as a father of two college bound young women to REMEMBER the degradation, unrestrained by Due Process of law, that the groundless racial and misandric Jim Crow era asserted - "African-American males could not be trusted around white Women."[5]  Yes there are infamous exceptions, but the overwhelming majority of Men are TRUSTWORTHY.  And WE the People constitutionally DEMAND the EQUAL protection of Due Process of Law.  We, men, have been doing our share and holding up our end for ALL of record history!!!!

Jim Crow and Jane Crow were both sustained and proliferated by an unconstitutional Article III assertion of "absolute immunity" first in Randall v. Brigham, 74 U. S. 536 (1868) asserting Floyd & Barker (Star Chamber 1607).  Randall v. Brigham (1868) was Judicial sophistry[6] at its finest, a judicial subterfuge to give the judiciary immunity from the recently enacted  Civil Rights Act of 1866.  The Civil Rights Act of 1866 made it a CRIME for "Whoever, under color of any law…, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States."  Judicial liability for the crime was brought up extensively in the congressional debates and EXPRESSLY made part of President Johnson's Veto (March 27, 1866), noted as "assailing the independence of the judiciary," which was then congressionally over ridden into statute two weeks later, April 9, 1866. The Civil Rights Act of 1866 was enacted into LAW over the VETO of the President, overridden by the Senate on April 6, 1866 (33 - 15) and then overridden by the House and became law on April 9, 1866 (122 - 41). 

Likewise the judicial sophistry[7] of Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 335 (1871), also asserting Floyd & Barker (Star Chamber 1607), was a subterfuge to give the judiciary ABSOLUTE immunity from the civil liability enacted by the Civil Rights Act of 1871.  Passed by the House on April 19, 1871 (93–74) and by the Senate on April 19, 1871 (36–13) and then it was signed into law by President Ulysses S. Grant on April 20, 1871.

The KICKER IS, wait for it… BOTH Randall v. Brigham (1868) and Bradley v. Fisher (1871) were based on the corrupt "black bag of tricks" assertion of Floyd & Barker (Star Chamber 1607) as precedent.  What Randall and Bradley fail to tell you is that the "Star Chamber" was abolished for CAUSE, I quote from the Act of Parliament "Abolition of the Star Chamber" July 5, 1641 "the power and authority thereby given unto it, be from the said first day of August repealed and absolutely revoked and made void." 

The causes were MANY, but one of particular note to anyone that has suffered at the hands of Jim Crow or Jane Crow "absolute immunity" was, and again I quote, "the said judges have not kept themselves to the points limited by the said statute, but have undertaken to punish where no law doth warrant, and to make decrees for things having no such authority, and to inflict heavier punishments than by any law is warranted.

So our sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid Black Robed Royalist Article III Supreme Court constructed, [8] and has since pulled the wool over We the Peoples eyes, a precedent from a court that asserted "absolute immunity" but whose power was, by Act of Parliament, ultimately "clearly and absolutely dissolved, taken away and determined," for cause, abusing said "absolute immunity."  That would be like allowing a potential thief into your house because his conspirator in crime a known thief, a convicted thief asserted that he would not steal before he was caught stealing.  If there is anything to be learned from Floyd & Barker (Star Chamber 1607) it is the Black Robed Royalist Article III Supreme Court CANNOT BE "ABSOLUTELY" TRUSTED!!!!!!!!!!  It is INSANITY to think any other way!!!!!!

As examples of the Judicial sophistry,[9] that has corrupted We the People's unalienable rights under color of law, I submit, Randall v. Brigham, 74 U.S. 7 (1868)[10] the origin of judicial criminal sophisticated[11] "absolute immunity," Bradley v. Fisher, 13 Wall. 335 (1872)[12] origin of sophisticated Judicial civil "absolute immunity," Blyew v. United States, 80 U.S. 581 (1871) sophisticated "absolute immunity" for racially motivate mass murder, United States v. Reese, 92 U.S. 214 (1875) sophisticated deprivation of the 15th Amendment's Voting Rights protection with the subterfuges of poll taxes, literacy tests, and grandfather clauses, United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875) sophisticated "absolute immunity" for racially motivated massacre (Colfax Riot/pogrom), United States v. Harris, 106 U.S. 629 (1883) sophisticated "absolute immunity" for the state's sanctioned kidnapping, assault and murder without regard to the 14th Amendment's security, Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3 (1883) creating sophisticated racial segregation and the ongoing Jim Crow discrimination over the "necessary and proper" "Act to protect all citizens in their civil and legal rights." 18 Stat. 335, enacted March 1, 1875, Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896) separate and UNEQUAL, clarifying sophisticated segregation over the necessary and proper "Act to protect all citizens in their civil and legal rights." 18 Stat. 335, enacted March 1, 1875, Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967) reaffirmed Judicial sophisticated "absolute immunity," Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 409 (1976) prosecutorial sophisticated "absolute immunity," Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978) sophisticated "absolute immunity" for forced sterilization, and Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) sophisticated[13] "absolute immunity" for "knowingly false testimony by police officers," and "all persons that were integral in the Judicial Process."   If that is not ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION of We the People's intent to establish justice, I cannot imagine what is.

The Constitution clearly states that "the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make."[14]  Clearly if indeed "absolute immunity" ever existed it was made null and void by "such Regulations as the Congress shall make" with the constitutional ex industria[15] reference to "Whoever, under color of any law" in § 2 of the 1866 Civil Rights Act[16] and "Every person who, under color of any statute" in the Civil Rights Act of 1871.[17]

In direct contradiction to the expressed REASONABLE limitations of the 4th and 5th Amendments' prosecutions of "otherwise infamous crime;" we have had 150 years, post Civil War, of unjust persecution of African American MALES and females in the "Jim Crow" era.  Now with the CoEd Crow and GI Crow in the Jane Crow era YOU are proposing to unjustly terrorize all males EVERY WHERE all the time.  George F. Will's recent articles in the New York Post ("Colleges mad with political correctness over campus rapes") and Washington Post ("Colleges become the victims of progressivism") concur.

"The Cyclops syndrome: to see with only one eye, in only one dimension and only half of reality.  Cyclops people stereotype the male by the actions of a minority, define the exceptions as the rule, ignore the majority, and ignore too the minority of female villains for a cleaner, clearer (supposedly) picture. Most murderers are male but most males are not murderers, and some women are. This is not rocket science. But misandry is less about reality than politics"[18]

The enlightened African American, I thought I voted for, would remember the injustice of being unwarrantedly victimized by the infamous racial AND misandric[19] "Jim Crow" assertion that "black men cannot be trusted around our white women."  That was THEN and is now an infamous assertion, with no authority other than racial and misandric infamy.

Our founding fathers knew the potential lethal force of an unsustainable infamous accusation when they originally amended the constitution with the Bill of Rights i.e., the 4th and 5th Amendments' reasonable probable cause, prohibition of infamy alone, as Due Process security, additionally post Civil War passage of the 14th amendment REASSERTED the Due Process and Equal Protection and provided for FEDERAL enforcement upon the states with ex industria[20] statute law[21]

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, June 12, 2014, 3:13:38 PM



[1] See also United States Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals Case #07-2614, 08-1823, 10-1947, 11-2425, 12-2435, 13-2200 and 14-1470…Docketed and denied Petitions for Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115, 11-8211, 13-5193 & 13-7030
[2] Misandry (Misandric) is not in everyone's dictionary but it's out there.
[3] George F. Will's recent articles in the New York Post "Colleges mad with political correctness over campus rapes" and Washington Post "Colleges become the victims of progressivism" concur.
[4] "Doubts on military's sex assault stats as numbers far exceed those for the U.S." By Rowan Scarborough-The Washington Times Sunday, April 6, 2014 -- "Congress To Continue Debate Over Military Sexual Assault Legislation"  AP  | By RICHARD LARDNER Posted: 03/12/2014 1:49 pm EDT
[5] "Southern Horrors: Lynch Laws in All Its Phases" by Ida B. Wells (1862 – 1931) - She suggested that, unlike the myth that white women were sexually at risk of attacks by black men, most liaisons between black men and white women were consensual.  Her writings investigated the incidents that were referred to as causes for lynching black men.
[6] "We have long enough suffered under the base prostitution of law to party passions in one judge, and the imbecility of another. In the hands of one the law is nothing more than an ambiguous text, to be explained by his sophistry into any meaning which may subserve his personal malice" (Thomas Jefferson, To John Tyler Monticello, May 26, 1810)
[7] "We have long enough suffered under the base prostitution of law to party passions in one judge, and the imbecility of another. In the hands of one the law is nothing more than an ambiguous text, to be explained by his sophistry into any meaning which may subserve his personal malice" (Thomas Jefferson, To John Tyler Monticello, May 26, 1810)
[8] Alexander Hamilton's assertions of danger of "constructive power" to rights with in Federalist number 84
[9] "We have long enough suffered under the base prostitution of law to party passions in one judge, and the imbecility of another. In the hands of one the law is nothing more than an ambiguous text, to be explained by his sophistry into any meaning which may subserve his personal malice" (Thomas Jefferson, To John Tyler Monticello, May 26, 1810)
[10] Randall v. Brigham, 74 U. S. 536 (1868) , asserting Floyd & Barker (Star Chamber 1607), was judicial sophistry at its finest, a judicial subterfuge to give the judiciary immunity from the UNQUALIFIED recently enacted Civil Rights Act of 1866 (18 USC §241-§242).
[11] Judicial sophistry is the "ABSOLUTE" WORST kind of sophistication, ibid.
[12] Likewise Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 335 (1871), also asserting Floyd & Barker (Star Chamber 1607), was a subterfuge to give the judiciary ABSOLUTE immunity from the UNQUALIFIED civil liability for "the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States" enacted by the Civil Rights Act of 1871 (42 USC §1983-§1985).
[13] Judicial sophistry is the "ABSOLUTE" WORST kind of sophistication, ibid.
[14] Constitution for the United States of America, Article III, Section 2, § 2
[16] now codified in Federal Statute laws as Criminal 18 U.S.C. § 241 & 242
[17] now codified in Federal Statute laws as Civil 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 1985
[19] Misandry (Misandric) is not in everyone's dictionary but it's out there.
[21] Cconstitutional ex industria[21] statute law "Whoever, under color of any law" in § 2 of the 1866 Civil Rights Act[21] (now codified in Federal Statute laws as Criminal 18 U.S.C. § 241 & 242) and "Every person who, under color of any statute" in the Civil Rights Act of 1871 (now codified in Federal Statute laws as Civil 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 1985)

--
Thanks in advance,
To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process
"Agere sequitur esse"
"Time is  of the essence"
David G. Jeep
http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/
My E-mail addresses are David.G.Jeep@GMail.com orDGJeep01@yahoo.com

(314) 514-5228

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








Date of email request: June 14, 2014
Shipment Activity--------------------------- Location--------------------- Date & Time
-- ----------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------- ------------------------
Depart USPS Sort Facility--- SAINT LOUIS, MO 63155-- June 13, 2014 8:45 pm
Processed thru USPS Sort Facility
      ----------------------------------- SAINT LOUIS, MO 63155-- June 13, 2014 7:37 pm
Acceptance----------------------- SAINT LOUIS, MO 63101-- June 13, 2014 2:48 pm
      ----------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------                        
      ----------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------                        
Expected Delivery Day, Washington, DC 20500-0001:- Monday, June 16, 2014
The White House                                   
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Delivered 06/19/2014 4:24am WASHINGTON 
---- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------
Expected Delivery By:
Monday, June 16, 2014
First-Class Mail®
Certified Mail