To Kill a Mocking Bird, The
Denial of Due Process
Jul 9, 2010
To Kill a Mocking Bird,
The Denial of Due Process
Revised Tuesday January 5, 2019 and Friday, March 04,
2011, Originally Posted Fri, July 9, 2010 10:33:12 AM
Jane Crow and Jim Crow
are both based on the conviction/lynching by infamous accusation without access
to 5th and 14th Amendment’s due process - Justice with the equal protection of Due
Process of Law.
The 50th anniversary of the
publication of Harper Lee’s, “To Kill a Mockingbird” was Sunday July 11, 2010. I have to ask,
have we lived up to its meaning, to its hope? We made it unfashionable to be a
racist. We eliminated most of the Jim Crow discrimination, yes. But have we
gone far enough?
Would there have been or
is there today a crime in the corrupt and malicious arrest, prosecution, trial
and conviction of the fictional character Tom Robinson? Tom Robinson was a
black crippled man with the audacity to feel sorry for a white woman. What did
he do wrong?
Sheriff Tate, did not
want to see Tom Robinson convicted, but he had to arrest him, RIGHT? The Prosecutor, Mr. Gilmer just wanted to
win his case. He was just prosecuting the evidence, RIGHT? Judge Taylor asked Atticus to represent and
defend Tom Robinson; he was trying to provide a fair process, RIGHT?
WRONG!!!
The arrest, the persecution, the trial
and the conviction of the fictional character Tom Robinson would have been a CRIMINALdenial of Due Process of Law[1], not that anyone would be prosecuted either then or now. Our
Public Minister’s, the Supreme Court, the Justice Department, and the Executive
Department have awarded themselves “absolute immunity.”
Admittedly racism has become untenable in
today’s America
“I wanted you to see what real courage
is, instead of getting the idea that courage is a man with a gun in his hand.
It's when you know you're licked before you begin but you begin anyway and you
see it through no matter what. You rarely win, but sometimes you do.”
~Harper Lee, To Kill a Mockingbird,
Chapter 11, spoken by the character Atticus
Do we have the courage to take on the
malice, corruption and incompetence that still infect our Justice system today?
The Sheriff, The Prosecutor, The Judge,
The Executive Department, and The Justice Department all know better, I
paraphrase slightly but I quote:
They are "representatives not of an ordinary
party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially
is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose interest,
therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done.
As such, they are in a peculiar and very definite sense the servant of the law,
the twofold aim of which is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer.
They may prosecute with earnestness and vigor—indeed, they should do so. But,
while they may strike hard blows, they are not at liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much their duty to refrain
from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction, as
it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one.
It is fair to say that the average jury,
in a greater or less degree, has confidence that these obligations, which so
plainly rest upon the state, will be faithfully observed. Consequently, improper suggestions, insinuations, and,
especially, assertions of personal knowledgeare apt to carry much weight
against the accused when they should properly carry none"[2](bolding and underlining added for
clarity).
The fictional character Tom Robinson was
denied fair Due Process of Law[3]. They got away with it in the past and
continue to get away with it in the present and will in the future because the
police, the prosecutors and the Judges have immunity they have no
responsibility for their official actions.
None of us has the protection of the law
as envisioned by our founding fathers. We are at the discretion of the police,
the prosecutors and the Judges. We have relinquished our inalienable rights in
favor of the police’s, the prosecutors’ and especially the Judges’ impunity.
The Police don’t have to investigate the
crimes they arrest people for. The Police don’t even need to know the technical
aspects of the crimes. They can just point a finger and lie on the witness
stand[4] to convict their innocent victims. They have immunity.
The Prosecutors have no professional
responsibility to verify the evidence they present. They have no professional
responsibility to provide exculpable evidence[5] that might prove the innocence of their
victims. They have immunity.
You would think that Judges as the
presiding authority would have some responsibility? Judges have absolutely no responsibility for the credibility of “Due Process” of
law. A Judge can knowingly sign a malicious, corrupt or incompetent warrant[6] and he or she is absolutely immune. The 4th Amendment’s protection “The right of the people to be secure in
their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and
seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable
cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place
to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized” is unenforceable and completely at any
Judges’ discretion. Once a Judge
signs it or lets an issue go to a jury it is all covered by HIS trickle down
absolute immunity. No one can be held accountable. A Judge can let it all go to hell in a hand basket and a Judge and
EVERYONE under their authority has impunity. They
have ABSOLUTE impunity[7].
The victims of the malice, corruption and
/ or incompetence, at their own expense, are forced against long odds to pursue
vindication in an appeal process that is just as UNJUST and corrupt. An appeal
process that is both more expensive and more time consuming for the slim
possibility for a dubious vindication in a name clearing hearing, there is no
redress for cost or damages.
So where do we go for Justice? There is
no justice in Our Justice system. The Supreme Court has affirmed it:
“This immunity applies even when the
judge is accused of acting maliciously and corruptly” (Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 13 Wall. 335 (1871) @ page 349), (Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967) @ page 554) and (Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11-12 (1991)).
and
“In such cases, there is no safety for
the citizen except in the protection of the (malicious and corrupt) judicial tribunals for rights which have
been invaded by the officers of the government professing to act in its name.
There remains to him but the alternative of resistance, which may amount to
crime.” (non-italic and parenthetical text added for clarity) (United States v. Lee, 106 U.S. 196 (1882) , Page 106 U. S. 219) (Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) @ 403 US 394-395)
Our police, prosecutors and judges are
just doing their jobs, RIGHT? The police, the prosecutors and the judges
have no regret or culpability, RIGHT? Their job has nothing to do with Justice,
their job is to arrest, persecute and adjudge so as to instill fear of the Law, RIGHT? Fear is more important than Justice, RIGHT? We must all live in FEAR of the potential
arrest, prosecution and conviction, without regard to our rights, the
protection of the law or the procedural and substantive protection of Due
Process, RIGHT? Abject assiduous fear is a requirement for
a civilized society, RIGHT?
WRONG!!!
The police, the prosecutors, the judges
and the entire Executive and Justice Departments of the United States of America
“The right of the people to be secure
in their persons, houses, papers, and effects… shall not be violated.”
It is the job of the Justice and
Executive Departments to see that neither those acting under color of law or
those acting outside the law violate this security.
Constitutionally “We the People” have
RIGHTS!!! Ninety-five percent (95%) of the people[8] have done nothing wrong and NEVER will.
We need to base our Government policies on the Majority, not the MINORITY!
“Mockingbirds don’t do one thing but make
music for us to enjoy . . . but sing their hearts out for us. That’s why it’s a
sin to kill a mockingbird.” ~Harper Lee, To Kill a Mockingbird
Too many mockingbirds have been destroyed
at the hands of our self-admitted malicious, corrupt and incompetent Justice
Department.
We HAVE RIGHTS in this
country!!!!!!!!!!!! We the People surrender NOTHING. "We the People of the United
States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice… and secure the
Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and
establish this Constitution for the United States of America[9] " The establishment of Justice under the Constitution and Laws of “We the
People” is the responsibility of our employees, the police, the prosecutors,
the Judges and our President.[10] We need to hold them liable per the 1stAmendment
“Congress shall make no law… abridging… the right of the people… to petition
the Government for a redress[11]of grievances.[12]
“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,” THE PROTECTION OF LAWS. Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 1 Cranch 137 (1803) Page 5 U. S. 163.
Not currently in America
"All the parties" who
participate in the unjust conviction of a Negro would be liable, including
"the grand jury, the petit jury, the judge, and the officer of the
law" who executes the judgment. Cong.Globe, 39th Cong., 1st Sess., at 598 (1866) Sen. Davis of Kentucky in
opposition to Section 2 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act Now codified as Title Criminal 18, U.S.C, § 241 & 242
David G. Jeep
cc: President Barack Hussein Obama
Justice Sonia Sotomayor
Eric H. Holder Jr., Attorney General of
the United States
Solicitor General of the United State s
e-mailed to a select group of favorites
file (Revised Friday, March
04, 2011, Originally Posted Fri, July 9, 2010 10:33:12 AM)
On a separate note, I would contend that we do not have any individual rights
in this country, "Everybody, BUT the innocent victim, has "ABSOLUTE
IMMUNITY""
for the deprivation of rights; but that is another story.
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: David G. Jeep
To: Barack Obama ; Barack Obama ; Claire Mccaskill ; David Plouffe ; "David Jeep Dave@dgjeep" ; Eric H. Holder Jr. ; Joe Biden ; Joe Biden ; Kit Bond ; Office of the Solicitor General ; President Barack Hussein Obama ; Raymond M. Meyer ; "Robert O'Connor" ; 48 Hours< 48hours@cbsnews.com>; Alan Dershowitz ; Amnesty International USA Midwest Office ; Amnesty International USA ; Anthony D. Romero ACLU ; Ari B. Bloomekatz ; Bill McClellan ; Bob Woodward ; Camilla Cavendish ; Caroline Fredrickson ACLU ; Carolyn Tuft ; CBS Evening News ; Chicago Tribune ; Chris Fusco ; CHRISTINE CHRISTINE BYERS ; Christopher Beam ; Daniel Politi Politi ; David Savage ; David G. Jeep ; Editor TomPaine.com ; editor@californiachronicle.com; Eidtor American Chronical ; Federal City ; FeedBack Human Rights First ; Genral Manager ; Irene Haskins ; J Mannies ; James Janega ; Jason Rosenbaum ; Jeff Coen ; Jeremy Kohler ; Joe Mahr ; John Kass ; KansasCityStar ; KMOV-TV ; "Ktvinews@Foxtv. Com" ; Lake Sun Leader DAILY ; Laura Meckler ; Letters to the Editor The New York Times ; Letters to the Editor ; Letters to the Editor ; Los Angeles Times ; Mary DeLach-Leonard ; McClatchy Newspapers News TIP ; Mike Wallace< 60m@cbsnews.com>; Mike Christian at 314-280-5222 FBI Report ; MSNBC on the Internet ; My Turn Editor Newsweek ; News Tip BBC ; News Tip CNN ; News Tribune Jefferson City ; Newsweek ; "Patrick M. O'Connell" ; Peace Economy News ; Pete Bland ; PressRelease politico.com ; Robert Patrick ; Sky News ; Slate Magazine ; Southeast Missourian ; St. Louis Business Journal ; St. Louis Justice and Shares ; Staff Caught.net ; STEPHEN STEPHEN DEERE ; Steve Chapman ; Sunday Morning CBS ; Tami Abdollah ; The Editors ; The Joplin Globe Publishing Company ; TheSpringfieldNews-Leader
Sent: Fri, July 9, 2010 10:33:12 AM
Subject: To Kill a Mocking Bird,
Footnotes
[1] 1st,
4th, 5th, 6th and14th Amendments, Title
18 Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 241 Conspiracy against rights & 242
Deprivation of rights under color of law and Title 42 § 1983. Civil
action for deprivation of rights
[3] The Constitution for the United States of America, Amendment XIV
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall… deprive any person of life,
liberty, or property, without due process of law & Title 18 Crimes
and Criminal Procedure § 241 Conspiracy against rights & 242
Deprivation of rights under color of law
[6] “Jim Crow” may be unfashionable, but “Jane Crow” discrimination,
the preference for a woman’s maternal rights over a man’s paternal rights in
Family Law reigns supreme. See also Writ of Certiorari 07-11115 to the Supreme
Court
[7] See Cases 08-1823 and 07-2614 Dismissed by the United States of
America8th Circuit Court of appeals
[10] United
States of America Constitution Article 2. § 3 “he shall take Care that the Laws be
faithfully executed”
To Kill a Mocking Bird,
The Denial of Due
Process
Revised Thursday,
February 16, 2012, Originally Posted Fri, July 9, 2010 10:33:12 AM
The 50th anniversary of the publication of Harper
Lee's, "To Kill a Mockingbird" was Sunday July 11, 2010. I have to ask,
have we lived up to its meaning, to its hope? We made it unfashionable to be a
racist. We eliminated most of the Jim Crow discrimination, yes. But have we
gone far enough?
Would there have been or
is there today a crime in the corrupt and malicious arrest, persecution, trial and
conviction of the fictional character Tom Robinson? Tom Robinson was a black
crippled man with the audacity to feel sorry for a white woman. What did he do
wrong?
Sheriff Tate, did not
want to see Tom Robinson convicted, but he had to arrest him, RIGHT? The Prosecutor, Mr. Gilmer just wanted to
win his case. He was just prosecuting the evidence, RIGHT? Judge Taylor asked Atticus to represent and
defend Tom Robinson; he was trying to provide a fair process, RIGHT?
WRONG!!!
The arrest, the
persecution, the trial and the conviction of the fictional character Tom
Robinson would have been an unconstitutional and CRIMINAL denial of Due Process of Law[1], not that anyone would be prosecuted
either then or now. Our Public Minister's,[2] the Supreme Court, the
Justice Department, and the Executive Department have awarded themselves
"absolute immunity."
Admittedly racism has
become untenable in today's America
"I wanted you to
see what real courage is, instead of getting the idea that courage is a man
with a gun in his hand. It's when you know you're licked before you begin but
you begin anyway and you see it through no matter what. You rarely win, but
sometimes you do." ~Harper Lee, To
Kill a Mockingbird, Chapter 11, spoken by the character Atticus
Do we have the courage[4] to take on the malice, corruption and incompetence that still
infect our Justice system today?
The Sheriff, The
Prosecutor, The Judge, The Executive Department, and The Justice Department all
know better, I paraphrase slightly but I quote:
They are "representatives not of an ordinary
party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern
impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose
interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case,
but that justice shall be done.
As such, they are in a peculiar and very definite sense the servant of the law,
the twofold aim of which is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer.
They may prosecute with earnestness and vigor—indeed, they should do so. But,
while they may strike hard blows, they are not at liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much their duty to refrain
from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction, as
it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one.
It is fair to say that
the average jury, in a greater or less degree, has confidence that these
obligations, which so plainly rest upon the state, will be faithfully observed.
Consequently, improper suggestions,
insinuations, and, especially, assertions of personal knowledge are apt to carry much weight against the
accused when they should properly carry none"[5] (bolding and underlining added for clarity).
The fictional character
Tom Robinson was denied fair Due Process of Law[6]. They got away with it in the past and continue to get away with
it in the present and will in the future because the police, the prosecutors
and the Judges have immunity they have no responsibility for their official
actions.
None of us has the
protection of the law as envisioned by our founding fathers. We are at the
discretion of the police, the prosecutors and the Judges. We have relinquished
our inalienable rights in favor of the police's, the prosecutors' and
especially the Judges' impunity.
The Police don't have to
investigate the crimes they arrest people for. The Police don't even need to
know the technical aspects of the crimes. They can just point a finger and lie
on the witness stand[7] to convict their innocent victims. They have immunity.
The Prosecutors have no
professional responsibility to verify the evidence they present. They have no
professional responsibility to provide exculpable evidence[8] that might prove the innocence of their victims. They have immunity.
You would think that
Judges as the presiding authority would have some responsibility? Judges have absolutely no
responsibility for the
credibility of "Due Process" of law. A Judge can knowingly sign a
malicious, corrupt or incompetent warrant[9] and he or she is
absolutely immune. The 4th Amendment's protection:
"The right of
the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against
unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants
shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and
particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to
be seized"
is unenforceable and
completely at any Judges' discretion. Once a Judge signs it or
lets an issue go to a jury it is all covered by HIS trickle down absolute
immunity. No one can be held accountable. A Judge can let it all go to hell in a hand basket and a Judge and
EVERYONE under their authority has impunity. They
have ABSOLUTE impunity[7][10].
The victims of the
malice, corruption and / or incompetence, at their own expense, are forced
against long odds to pursue vindication in an appeal process that is just as
UNJUST and corrupt. An appeal process that is both more expensive and more time
consuming for the slim possibility for a dubious vindication in a name clearing
hearing, there is no redress for cost or damages.
So where do we go for
Justice? There is no justice in Our Justice system. The Supreme Court has
affirmed it:
"This immunity
applies even when the judge is accused of acting maliciously and corruptly"
(Bradley v. Fisher, 80
U.S. 13 Wall. 335 (1871) @ page 349), (Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547
(1967) @ page 554) and (Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11-12
(1991)).
and
"In such cases,
there is no safety for the citizen except in the protection of the (malicious and corrupt) judicial tribunals for rights which have
been invaded by the officers of the government professing to act in its name.
There remains to him but the alternative of resistance, which may amount to
crime." (non-italic and parenthetical text added for clarity) (United States v. Lee, 106
U.S. 196 (1882) , Page 106 U. S. 219)
(Bivens v. Six Unknown
Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) @ 403 US 394-395)
Our police, prosecutors
and judges are just doing their jobs, RIGHT? The police, the prosecutors and the judges
have no regret or culpability, RIGHT? Their job has nothing to do with Justice,
their job is to arrest, persecute and adjudge so as to instill fear of the Law, RIGHT? Fear is more important than Justice, RIGHT? We must all live in FEAR of the potential
arrest, prosecution and conviction, without regard to our rights, the
protection of the law or the procedural and substantive protection of Due
Process, RIGHT? Abject assiduous fear is a requirement for
a civilized society, RIGHT?
WRONG!!!
The police, the
prosecutors, the judges and the entire Executive and Justice Departments of the
United States of America
"The right of
the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects… shall
not be violated."
It is the job of the
Justice and Executive Departments to see that neither those acting under color
of law nor those acting outside the law violate this security.
Constitutionally
"We the People" have RIGHTS!!! Ninety-five percent (95%) of the people[11] have done nothing wrong and NEVER will. We need to base our
Government policies on the Majority, not the MINORITY!
"Mockingbirds don't
do one thing but make music for us to enjoy . . . but sing their hearts out for
us. That's why it's a sin to kill a mockingbird." ~Harper Lee, To Kill a
Mockingbird
Too many mockingbirds
have been destroyed at the hands of our self-admitted malicious, corrupt and
incompetent Justice Department.
Justice is the
indispensable FOUNDATION of LIBERTY
We HAVE RIGHTS in this
country!!! "Here, in strictness, the people surrender nothing;
and as they retain every thing they have no need of particular reservations.
"WE, THE PEOPLE of the United States, to secure the blessings of liberty
to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for
the United States of America."[12] The establishment of
Justice under the Constitution and Laws of "We the
People" is the responsibility of our employees, the police, the
prosecutors, the Judges and our President[13].
We need to hold them liable per the 1st Amendment "Congress shall make no law…
abridging… the right of the people… to petition the Government for a redress[14] of
grievances[15].
"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," THE PROTECTION OF LAWS. Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S.
1 Cranch 137 (1803) Page 5 U. S. 163.
Not currently in America
David G. Jeep
cc: President Barack
Hussein Obama
Justice Sonia Sotomayor
Eric H. Holder Jr.,
Attorney General of the United
States
Solicitor General of the
United States
e-mailed to a select
group of favorites
file Originally Posted Fri, July 9, 2010 10:33:12 AM
"All the
parties" who participate in the unjust conviction of a Negro would be
liable, including "the grand jury, the petit jury, the judge, and the
officer of the law" who executes the judgment." Cong.Globe,
39th Cong., 1st Sess., at 598 (1866)
Sen. Davis of Kentucky speaking to the scope and in opposition to Section 2 of the 1866 Civil Rights Act now codified into statute law as Title
Criminal 18, U.S.C, § 241 & 242
DGJeep"The Earth and everything
that's in it" (http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/)
From: David G. Jeep
To: Barack Obama ; Barack Obama ; Claire Mccaskill ; David Plouffe ;
"David Jeep Dave@dgjeep" ; Eric H. Holder Jr. ; Joe Biden ; Joe Biden
; Kit Bond ; Office of the Solicitor General ; President Barack Hussein Obama ;
Raymond M. Meyer ; "Robert O'Connor" ; 48 Hours
<48hours@cbsnews.com>; Alan Dershowitz ; Amnesty International
USA Midwest Office ; Amnesty International USA ; Anthony D. Romero ACLU ; Ari
B. Bloomekatz ; Bill McClellan ; Bob Woodward ; Camilla Cavendish ; Caroline
Fredrickson ACLU ; Carolyn Tuft ; CBS Evening News ; Chicago Tribune ; Chris
Fusco ; CHRISTINE CHRISTINE BYERS ; Christopher Beam ; Daniel Politi Politi ;
David Savage ; David G. Jeep ; Editor TomPaine.com ;
editor@californiachronicle.com; Eidtor American Chronical ; Federal City ;
FeedBack Human Rights First ; Genral Manager ; Irene Haskins ; J Mannies ;
James Janega ; Jason Rosenbaum ; Jeff Coen ; Jeremy Kohler ; Joe Mahr ; John Kass
; KansasCityStar ; KMOV-TV ; "Ktvinews@Foxtv. Com" ; Lake Sun Leader
DAILY ; Laura Meckler ; Letters to the Editor The New York Times ; Letters to
the Editor ; Letters to the Editor ; Los Angeles Times ; Mary DeLach-Leonard ;
McClatchy Newspapers News TIP ; Mike Wallace <60m@cbsnews.com>;
Mike Christian at 314-280-5222 FBI Report ; MSNBC on the Internet ; My Turn
Editor Newsweek ; News Tip BBC ; News Tip CNN ; News Tribune Jefferson City ;
Newsweek ; "Patrick M. O'Connell" ; Peace Economy News ; Pete Bland ;
PressRelease politico.com ; Robert Patrick ; Sky News ; Slate Magazine ; Southeast
Missourian ; St. Louis Business Journal ; St. Louis Justice and Shares ; Staff
Caught.net ; STEPHEN STEPHEN DEERE ; Steve Chapman ; Sunday Morning CBS ; Tami
Abdollah ; The Editors ; The Joplin Globe Publishing Company ;
TheSpringfieldNews-Leader
Sent: Fri, July 9, 2010
10:33:12 AM
Subject: To Kill a Mocking Bird,
[1] 1st,
4th, 5th, 6th and 14th Amendments, Title
18 Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 241 Conspiracy against rights & 242
Deprivation of rights under color of law and Title 42 § 1983. Civil
action for deprivation of rights
[2] Ministerially
created rules are SECONDARY, in a Democratic Constitutional form of government,
to the will of the people as specifically expressed in the Constitution and the
Statute law. For anyone to ministerially grant immunity from the Constitution
and Statute law is to act in direct conflict with the tenor of the commission
under which the MINISTERIAL authority was granted.
[3] Incompetence is the
most insidious and it is covered up by the gratuitous grant of malice,
corruption and dishonesty!!!!
[4] Edward R. Murrow
said in regard to McCarthyism's fear mongering "We will not walk in
fear, one of another. We will not be driven into an age of unreason if we dig
deep into our history and remember we
are not descended from fearful men."
[5] Due Process of Law
as described in Berger v. United States 295 U.S. 78 (1935)
[6] The Constitution for
the United States of America, Amendment XIV No State shall make or enforce any
law which shall… deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due
process of law & Title 18 Crimes
and Criminal Procedure § 241 Conspiracy against rights & 242
Deprivation of rights under color of law
[7] See Case 08-1823
Dismissed by the United
States of America
[8] See Case 08-1823
Dismissed by the United
States of America
[9] "Jim Crow"
may be unfashionable, but "Jane Crow" discrimination, the preference
for a woman's maternal rights over a man's paternal rights in Family Law reigns
supreme. See also Writ of Certiorari 07-11115 to the Supreme Court
[10] See Cases 08-1823 and 07-2614 Dismissed by the United States of America
[11] Criminals amount to
5% of the population
[12] Paraphrased from
the Preamble to the United
States
[13] United
States of America Constitution Article 2. § 3 "he shall take Care that the Laws be
faithfully executed"
--
Thanks in advance
To Kill a Mocking Bird,
The Denial of Due Process
"agere sequitor esse"
"Time is of the
essence"
David G. Jeep
http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/E-mail is preferred Dave@DGJeep.com, DGJeep@DGJeep.com
(314) 514-5228
David G. Jeep
c/o The Bridge
1610 Olive Street,
Saint Louis, MO 63103-2316
David G. Jeep
http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/E-mail is preferred Dave@DGJeep.com, DGJeep@DGJeep.com
(314) 514-5228
David G. Jeep
c/o The Bridge
1610 Olive Street,
Saint Louis, MO 63103-2316
To Kill a Mocking Bird,
The Denial of
Due Process
Revised Friday, March 04,
2011, Originally Posted Fri, July 9, 2010 10:33:12 AM
The 50th anniversary of the publication of Harper
Lee’s, “To Kill a Mockingbird” was
Sunday July 11, 2010. I have to ask, have we lived up to its meaning, to its
hope? We made it unfashionable to be a racist. We eliminated most of the Jim
Crow discrimination, yes. But have we gone far enough?
Would there have been or is there today a
crime in the corrupt and malicious arrest, prosecution, trial and conviction of
the fictional character Tom Robinson? Tom Robinson was a black crippled man
with the audacity to feel sorry for a white woman. What did he do wrong?
Sheriff Tate, did not want to see Tom
Robinson convicted, but he had to arrest him,
RIGHT? The Prosecutor,
Mr. Gilmer just wanted to win his case. He was just prosecuting the evidence, RIGHT? Judge Taylor asked Atticus to represent and
defend Tom Robinson; he was trying to provide a fair process, RIGHT?
WRONG!!!
The arrest, the persecution, the trial
and the conviction of the fictional character Tom Robinson would have been a CRIMINAL denial of Due Process of Law[1], not that anyone would be prosecuted either then or now.
Our Public Minister’s, the Supreme Court, the Justice Department, and the
Executive Department have awarded themselves “absolute immunity.”
Admittedly racism has become untenable in
today’s America. But racism is only one of the symptoms of the malice, the
corruption and the incompetence that would have convicted the fictional
character Tom Robinson. Atticus issues a challenge of a sort to Scout, his
daughter, and Jem, his son. I quote:
“I wanted you to see what real courage
is, instead of getting the idea that courage is a man with a gun in his hand.
It's when you know you're licked before you begin but you begin anyway and you
see it through no matter what. You rarely win, but sometimes you do.”
~Harper Lee, To Kill a Mockingbird,
Chapter 11, spoken by the character Atticus
Do we have the courage to take on the
malice, corruption and incompetence that still infect our Justice system today?
The Sheriff, The Prosecutor, The Judge,
The Executive Department, and The Justice Department all know better, I
paraphrase slightly but I quote:
They are "representatives not of an ordinary
party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern
impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose
interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case,
but that justice shall be done.
As such, they are in a peculiar and very definite sense the servant of the law,
the twofold aim of which is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer.
They may prosecute with earnestness and vigor—indeed, they should do so. But,
while they may strike hard blows, they are not at liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much their duty to refrain
from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction, as
it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one.
It is fair to say that the average jury,
in a greater or less degree, has confidence that these obligations, which so
plainly rest upon the state, will be faithfully observed. Consequently, improper suggestions, insinuations, and,
especially, assertions of personal knowledge are apt to carry much weight against the
accused when they should properly carry none" [2] (bolding and underlining added for
clarity).
The fictional character Tom Robinson was
denied fair Due Process of Law[3]. They got away with it in the past and continue to get away with
it in the present and will in the future because the police, the prosecutors
and the Judges have immunity they have no responsibility for their official
actions.
None of us has the protection of the law
as envisioned by our founding fathers. We are at the discretion of the police,
the prosecutors and the Judges. We have relinquished our inalienable rights in
favor of the police’s, the prosecutors’ and especially the Judges’ impunity.
The Police don’t have to investigate the
crimes they arrest people for. The Police don’t even need to know the technical
aspects of the crimes. They can just point a finger and lie on the witness
stand[4] to convict their innocent victims. They have immunity.
The Prosecutors have no professional
responsibility to verify the evidence they present. They have no professional
responsibility to provide exculpable evidence[5] that might prove the innocence of their
victims. They have immunity.
You would think that Judges as the
presiding authority would have some responsibility? Judges have absolutely no
responsibility for the
credibility of “Due Process” of law. A Judge can knowingly sign a malicious,
corrupt or incompetent warrant[6] and he or she is absolutely immune. The 4th Amendment’s protection “The right of the people to be secure in
their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and
seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable
cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place
to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized” is unenforceable and completely at any
Judges’ discretion. Once a Judge
signs it or lets an issue go to a jury it is all covered by HIS trickle down
absolute immunity. No one can be held accountable. A Judge can let it all go to hell in a hand basket and a Judge and
EVERYONE under their authority has impunity. They
have ABSOLUTE impunity[7].
The victims of the malice, corruption and
/ or incompetence, at their own expense, are forced against long odds to pursue
vindication in an appeal process that is just as UNJUST and corrupt. An appeal
process that is both more expensive and more time consuming for the slim
possibility for a dubious vindication in a name clearing hearing, there is no
redress for cost or damages.
So where do we go for Justice? There is
no justice in Our Justice system. The Supreme Court has affirmed it:
“This immunity applies even when the
judge is accused of acting maliciously and corruptly” (Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 13 Wall. 335 (1871) @ page 349), (Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967) @ page 554) and (Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11-12 (1991)).
and
“In such cases, there is no safety for
the citizen except in the protection of the (malicious and corrupt) judicial tribunals for rights which have
been invaded by the officers of the government professing to act in its name.
There remains to him but the alternative of resistance, which may amount to
crime.” (non-italic and parenthetical text added for clarity) (United States v. Lee, 106 U.S. 196 (1882) , Page 106 U. S. 219) (Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) @ 403 US 394-395)
Our police, prosecutors and judges are
just doing their jobs, RIGHT? The police, the prosecutors and the judges
have no regret or culpability, RIGHT? Their job has nothing to do with Justice,
their job is to arrest, persecute and adjudge so as to instill fear of the Law, RIGHT? Fear is more important than Justice, RIGHT? We must all live in FEAR of the potential
arrest, prosecution and conviction, without regard to our rights, the
protection of the law or the procedural and substantive protection of Due
Process, RIGHT? Abject assiduous fear is a requirement for
a civilized society, RIGHT?
WRONG!!!
The police, the prosecutors, the judges
and the entire Executive and Justice Departments of the United States of
America’s JOB is not to intimidate nor threaten, nor instill fear. Their job is Justice!!! It is best expressed best by the protection
of IV Amendment:
“The right of the people to be secure
in their persons, houses, papers, and effects… shall not be violated.”
It is the job of the Justice and
Executive Departments to see that neither those acting under color of law or
those acting outside the law violate this security.
Constitutionally “We the People” have
RIGHTS!!! Ninety-five percent (95%) of the people[8] have done nothing wrong and NEVER will.
We need to base our Government policies on the Majority, not the MINORITY!
“Mockingbirds don’t do one thing but make
music for us to enjoy . . . but sing their hearts out for us. That’s why it’s a
sin to kill a mockingbird.” ~Harper Lee, To Kill a Mockingbird
Too many mockingbirds have been destroyed
at the hands of our self-admitted malicious, corrupt and incompetent Justice
Department.
We HAVE RIGHTS in this
country!!!!!!!!!!!! We the People surrender NOTHING. "We the People of the United
States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice… and secure the
Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and
establish this Constitution for the United States of America.[9] " The establishment of Justice under the Constitution and Laws of “We the
People” is the responsibility of our employees, the police, the prosecutors,
the Judges and our President[10]. We need to hold them liable per the 1st Amendment “Congress shall make no law…
abridging… the right of the people… to petition the Government for a redress[11] of grievances[12].
“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,” THE PROTECTION OF LAWS. Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 1 Cranch 137 (1803) Page 5 U. S. 163.
Not currently in America, the land of the
free and the home of the brave, we have NO freedom; we have NO courage. But yet, I am an idiot, I still have the
audacity of HOPE.
David G. Jeep
cc: President Barack Hussein Obama
Justice Sonia Sotomayor
Eric H. Holder Jr., Attorney General of
the United States
Solicitor General of the United State s
e-mailed to a select group of favorites
file (Revised Friday, March
04, 2011, Originally Posted Fri, July 9, 2010 10:33:12 AM)
"All the parties" who
participate in the unjust conviction of a Negro would be liable, including
"the grand jury, the petit jury, the judge, and the officer of the law"
who executes the judgment. Cong.Globe, 39th Cong., 1st Sess., at 598 (1866) Sen. Davis of Kentucky in
opposition to Section 2 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act Now codified as Title Criminal 18, U.S.C, § 241 & 242
On a separate note, I would contend that
we do not have any individual rights in this country, "Everybody, BUT the innocent victim, has "ABSOLUTE
IMMUNITY""
for the deprivation of rights; but that is another story.
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: David G. Jeep
To: Barack Obama ; Barack Obama ; Claire Mccaskill ; David Plouffe ; "David Jeep Dave@dgjeep" ; Eric H. Holder Jr. ; Joe Biden ; Joe Biden ; Kit Bond ; Office of the Solicitor General ; President Barack Hussein Obama ; Raymond M. Meyer ; "Robert O'Connor" ; 48 Hours <48hours@cbsnews.com>; Alan Dershowitz ; Amnesty International USA Midwest Office ; Amnesty International USA ; Anthony D. Romero ACLU ; Ari B. Bloomekatz ; Bill McClellan ; Bob Woodward ; Camilla Cavendish ; Caroline Fredrickson ACLU ; Carolyn Tuft ; CBS Evening News ; Chicago Tribune ; Chris Fusco ; CHRISTINE CHRISTINE BYERS ; Christopher Beam ; Daniel Politi Politi ; David Savage ; David G. Jeep ; Editor TomPaine.com ; editor@californiachronicle.com; Eidtor American Chronical ; Federal City ; FeedBack Human Rights First ; Genral Manager ; Irene Haskins ; J Mannies ; James Janega ; Jason Rosenbaum ; Jeff Coen ; Jeremy Kohler ; Joe Mahr ; John Kass ; KansasCityStar ; KMOV-TV ; "Ktvinews@Foxtv. Com" ; Lake Sun Leader DAILY ; Laura Meckler ; Letters to the Editor The New York Times ; Letters to the Editor ; Letters to the Editor ; Los Angeles Times ; Mary DeLach-Leonard ; McClatchy Newspapers News TIP ; Mike Wallace <60m@cbsnews.com>; Mike Christian at 314-280-5222 FBI Report ; MSNBC on the Internet ; My Turn Editor Newsweek ; News Tip BBC ; News Tip CNN ; News Tribune Jefferson City ; Newsweek ; "Patrick M. O'Connell" ; Peace Economy News ; Pete Bland ; PressRelease politico.com ; Robert Patrick ; Sky News ; Slate Magazine ; Southeast Missourian ; St. Louis Business Journal ; St. Louis Justice and Shares ; Staff Caught.net ; STEPHEN STEPHEN DEERE ; Steve Chapman ; Sunday Morning CBS ; Tami Abdollah ; The Editors ; The Joplin Globe Publishing Company ; TheSpringfieldNews-Leader
Sent: Fri, July 9, 2010 10:33:12 AM
Subject: To Kill a Mocking Bird,
To: Barack Obama ; Barack Obama ; Claire Mccaskill ; David Plouffe ; "David Jeep Dave@dgjeep" ; Eric H. Holder Jr. ; Joe Biden ; Joe Biden ; Kit Bond ; Office of the Solicitor General ; President Barack Hussein Obama ; Raymond M. Meyer ; "Robert O'Connor" ; 48 Hours <48hours@cbsnews.com>; Alan Dershowitz ; Amnesty International USA Midwest Office ; Amnesty International USA ; Anthony D. Romero ACLU ; Ari B. Bloomekatz ; Bill McClellan ; Bob Woodward ; Camilla Cavendish ; Caroline Fredrickson ACLU ; Carolyn Tuft ; CBS Evening News ; Chicago Tribune ; Chris Fusco ; CHRISTINE CHRISTINE BYERS ; Christopher Beam ; Daniel Politi Politi ; David Savage ; David G. Jeep ; Editor TomPaine.com ; editor@californiachronicle.com; Eidtor American Chronical ; Federal City ; FeedBack Human Rights First ; Genral Manager ; Irene Haskins ; J Mannies ; James Janega ; Jason Rosenbaum ; Jeff Coen ; Jeremy Kohler ; Joe Mahr ; John Kass ; KansasCityStar ; KMOV-TV ; "Ktvinews@Foxtv. Com" ; Lake Sun Leader DAILY ; Laura Meckler ; Letters to the Editor The New York Times ; Letters to the Editor ; Letters to the Editor ; Los Angeles Times ; Mary DeLach-Leonard ; McClatchy Newspapers News TIP ; Mike Wallace <60m@cbsnews.com>; Mike Christian at 314-280-5222 FBI Report ; MSNBC on the Internet ; My Turn Editor Newsweek ; News Tip BBC ; News Tip CNN ; News Tribune Jefferson City ; Newsweek ; "Patrick M. O'Connell" ; Peace Economy News ; Pete Bland ; PressRelease politico.com ; Robert Patrick ; Sky News ; Slate Magazine ; Southeast Missourian ; St. Louis Business Journal ; St. Louis Justice and Shares ; Staff Caught.net ; STEPHEN STEPHEN DEERE ; Steve Chapman ; Sunday Morning CBS ; Tami Abdollah ; The Editors ; The Joplin Globe Publishing Company ; TheSpringfieldNews-Leader
Sent: Fri, July 9, 2010 10:33:12 AM
Subject: To Kill a Mocking Bird,
[1]1st, 4th, 5th, 6th and 14th Amendments, Title 18 Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 241
Conspiracy against rights & 242 Deprivation of rights under color of
law and Title 42 § 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights
[3] The Constitution for the United States of
America, Amendment XIV No State shall make or enforce any law which shall…
deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law
& Title 18 Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 241
Conspiracy against rights & 242 Deprivation of rights under color of
law
[6]“Jim Crow” may be unfashionable, but “Jane Crow” discrimination,
the preference for a woman’s maternal rights over a man’s paternal rights in
Family Law reigns supreme. See also Writ of Certiorari 07-11115 to the Supreme
Court
[7] See Cases 08-1823 and 07-2614 Dismissed by the United States of America
8th Circuit Court of
appeals
[10]United States of America Constitution Article 2. § 3“he shall take Care that the Laws be
faithfully executed”
[11] re·dress ri-dres; v. ri-dres –noun
1.compensation or satisfaction for a wrong or injury. n. ree-dres,
To Kill a Mocking Bird,
The Denial of
Due Process
The 50th anniversary of the publication of Harper
Lee’s, “To Kill a Mockingbird” is
this Sunday July 11, 2010. I have to ask, have we lived up to its meaning, to
its hope? We made it unfashionable to be a racist. We eliminated most of the
Jim Crow discrimination, yes. But have we gone far enough?
Would there have been or is there today a
crime in the corrupt and malicious arrest, prosecution, trial and conviction of
the fictional character Tom Robinson? Tom Robinson was a black crippled man
with the audacity to feel sorry for a white woman. What did he do wrong?
Sheriff Tate, did not want to see Tom
Robinson convicted, but he had to arrest him,
RIGHT? The Prosecutor,
Mr. Gilmer just wanted to win his case. He was just prosecuting the evidence, RIGHT? Judge Taylor asked Atticus to represent and
defend Tom Robinson; he was trying to provide a fair process, RIGHT?
WRONG, I disagree; the arrest, the
persecution, the trial and the conviction of the fictional character Tom
Robinson would have been a CRIMINAL denial of Due Process of Law[1], not that anyone would be prosecuted either then or now.
Admittedly racism has become untenable in
today’s America. But racism is only one of the symptoms of the malice, the
corruption and the incompetence that would have convicted the fictional
character Tom Robinson. Atticus issues a challenge of a sort to Scout, his
daughter, and Jem, his son. I quote:
“I wanted you to see what real courage
is, instead of getting the idea that courage is a man with a gun in his hand.
It's when you know you're licked before you begin but you begin anyway and you
see it through no matter what. You rarely win, but sometimes you do.” ~Harper
Lee, To Kill a Mockingbird,
Chapter 11, spoken by the character Atticus
Do we have the courage to take on the
malice, corruption and incompetence that still infect our Justice system today?
The Sheriff, The Prosecutor, The Judge
all know better, I paraphrase slightly but I quote:
They are “representatives not of an ordinary
party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern
impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose
interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case,
but that justice shall be done. As such, they are in a peculiar and very
definite sense the servant of the law, the twofold aim of which is that guilt
shall not escape or innocence suffer. They may prosecute with earnestness and
vigor—indeed, they should do so. But, while they may strike hard blows, they
are not at liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much their duty to refrain
from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction, as it is to
use every legitimate means to bring about a just one.
It is fair to say that the average jury,
in a greater or less degree, has confidence that these obligations, which so
plainly rest upon the state, will be faithfully observed. Consequently, improper suggestions, insinuations, and, especially,
assertions of personal knowledge are apt to carry much weight against the
accused when they should properly carry none.[2]”
The fictional character Tom Robinson was
denied fair Due Process of Law[3]. They got away with it in the past and continue to get away with
it in the present and will in the future because the police, the prosecutors
and the Judges have immunity they have no responsibility for their official
actions.
None of us has the protection of the law
as envisioned by our founding fathers. We are at the discretion of the police,
the prosecutors and the Judges. We have relinquished our inalienable rights in
favor of the police’s, the prosecutors’ and especially the Judges’ impunity.
The Police don’t have to investigate the
crimes they arrest people for. The Police don’t even need to know the technical
aspects of the crimes. They can just point a finger and lie on the witness
stand[4] to convict their innocent victims. They have immunity.
The Prosecutors have no professional
responsibility to verify the evidence they present. They have no professional
responsibility to provide exculpable evidence[5] that might prove the innocence of their
victims. They have immunity.
You would think that Judges as the
presiding authority would have some responsibility? Judges have absolutely no
responsibility for the credibility
of “Due Process” of law. A Judge can knowingly sign a malicious, corrupt or
incompetent warrant[6] and he or she is absolutely immune. The 4th Amendment’s protection “The right of the people to be secure in their
persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,
shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported
by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and
the persons or things to be seized” is
unenforceable and completely at any Judges’ discretion. Once a Judge signs it or lets an issue go
to a jury it is all covered by HIS trickle down absolute immunity. No one can be
held accountable. A Judge can let it all go to hell in a hand basket and a Judge and
EVERYONE under their authority has impunity. They
have ABSOLUTE impunity[7].
The victims of the malice, corruption and
/ or incompetence, at their own expense, are forced against long odds to pursue
vindication in an appeal process that is just as UNJUST and corrupt. An appeal process
that is both more expensive and more time consuming for the slim possibility for
a dubious vindication in a name clearing hearing, there is no redress for cost or
damages.
So where do we go for Justice? There is no
justice in Our Justice system. The Supreme Court has affirmed it themselves,
“This (absolute) immunity applies even when the judge is accused
of acting maliciously and corruptly” (Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 13 Wall. 335 (1871) @ page 349), (Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967) @ page 554) and (Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11-12 (1991)).
and
“In such cases, there is no safety for
the citizen except in the protection of the (malicious and corrupt) judicial tribunals for rights which have
been invaded by the officers of the government professing to act in its name. There
remains to him but the alternative of resistance, which may amount to crime.”
(United States v. Lee, 106 U.S. 196 (1882) , Page 106 U. S. 219) (Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) @ 403 US 394-395)
Our police, prosecutors and judges are just
doing their jobs, RIGHT? The police, the prosecutors and the judges have
no regret or culpability, RIGHT? Their job has nothing to do with Justice, their
job is to arrest, persecute and adjudge so as to instill fear of the Law, RIGHT? Fear is more important than Justice, RIGHT? We must all live in FEAR of the potential arrest,
prosecution and conviction, without regard to our rights, the protection of the
law or the procedural and substantive protection of Due Process, RIGHT? Abject assiduous fear is a requirement for a
civilized society, RIGHT?
“Mockingbirds don’t do one thing but make
music for us to enjoy . . . but sing their hearts out for us. That’s why it’s a
sin to kill a mockingbird.” ~Harper Lee, To Kill a Mockingbird
I say NO!!!!!!!!!!!!
Too many mockingbirds have been destroyed
at the hands of our self-admitted malicious, corrupt and incompetent Justice Department.
We HAVE RIGHTS in this country!!!!!!!!!!!!
We the People surrender NOTHING. "We
the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice… and secure the Blessings
of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution
for the United States of America.[8]" The establishment of Justice under the Constitution and Laws of “We the People”
is the responsibility of our employees, the police, the prosecutors, the Judges
and our President[9]. We need to hold them liable per the 1st Amendment “Congress shall make no law… abridging…
the right of the people… to petition the Government for a redress[10] of grievances[11].
“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,” THE PROTECTION OF LAWS. Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 1 Cranch 137 (1803) Page 5 U. S. 163.
Not currently in America, the land of the
free and the home of the brave, we have NO freedom; we have NO courage. But yet, I am an idiot, I still have HOPE.
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: President Barack Hussein Obama
Justice Sonia Sotomayor
Eric H. Holder Jr., Attorney General of the
United States
Solicitor General of the United State s
e-mailed to a select group of favorites
file
[1] 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th and 14th Amendments, Title 18 Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 241 Conspiracy
against rights & 242 Deprivation of rights under color of law and Title 42 § 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights
[3] The Constitution for the United States of
America, Amendment XIV No State shall make or enforce any law which shall… deprive
any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law & Title 18 Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 241 Conspiracy
against rights & 242 Deprivation of rights under color of law
[6] “Jim Crow” may be unfashionable, but “Jane
Crow” discrimination, the preference for a woman’s maternal rights over a man’s
paternal rights in Family Law reigns supreme. See also Writ of Certiorari 07-11115
to the Supreme Court
[9] United States of America Constitution Article 2. § 3 “he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully
executed”
1. compensation
or satisfaction for a wrong or injury.
1. The cause
of hardship or harm.
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: David G. Jeep
To: Barack Obama ; Barack Obama ; Claire Mccaskill ; David Plouffe ; "David Jeep Dave@dgjeep" ; Eric H. Holder Jr. ; Joe Biden ; Joe Biden ; Kit Bond ; Office of the Solicitor General ; President Barack Hussein Obama ; Raymond M. Meyer ; "Robert O'Connor" ; 48 Hours <48hours@cbsnews.com>; Alan Dershowitz ; Amnesty International USA Midwest Office ; Amnesty International USA ; Anthony D. Romero ACLU ; Ari B. Bloomekatz ; Bill McClellan ; Bob Woodward ; Camilla Cavendish ; Caroline Fredrickson ACLU ; Carolyn Tuft ; CBS Evening News ; Chicago Tribune ; Chris Fusco ; CHRISTINE CHRISTINE BYERS ; Christopher Beam ; Daniel Politi Politi ; David Savage ; David G. Jeep ; Editor TomPaine.com ; editor@californiachronicle.com; Eidtor American Chronical ; Federal City ; FeedBack Human Rights First ; Genral Manager ; Irene Haskins ; J Mannies ; James Janega ; Jason Rosenbaum ; Jeff Coen ; Jeremy Kohler ; Joe Mahr ; John Kass ; KansasCityStar ; KMOV-TV ; "Ktvinews@Foxtv. Com" ; Lake Sun Leader DAILY ; Laura Meckler ; Letters to the Editor The New York Times ; Letters to the Editor ; Letters to the Editor ; Los Angeles Times ; Mary DeLach-Leonard ; McClatchy Newspapers News TIP ; Mike Wallace <60m@cbsnews.com>; Mike Christian at 314-280-5222 FBI Report ; MSNBC on the Internet ; My Turn Editor Newsweek ; News Tip BBC ; News Tip CNN ; News Tribune Jefferson City ; Newsweek ; "Patrick M. O'Connell" ; Peace Economy News ; Pete Bland ; PressRelease politico.com ; Robert Patrick ; Sky News ; Slate Magazine ; Southeast Missourian ; St. Louis Business Journal ; St. Louis Justice and Shares ; Staff Caught.net ; STEPHEN STEPHEN DEERE ; Steve Chapman ; Sunday Morning CBS ; Tami Abdollah ; The Editors ; The Joplin Globe Publishing Company ; TheSpringfieldNews-Leader
Sent: Fri, July 9, 2010 10:33:12 AM
Subject: To Kill a Mocking Bird,
To: Barack Obama ; Barack Obama ; Claire Mccaskill ; David Plouffe ; "David Jeep Dave@dgjeep" ; Eric H. Holder Jr. ; Joe Biden ; Joe Biden ; Kit Bond ; Office of the Solicitor General ; President Barack Hussein Obama ; Raymond M. Meyer ; "Robert O'Connor" ; 48 Hours <48hours@cbsnews.com>; Alan Dershowitz ; Amnesty International USA Midwest Office ; Amnesty International USA ; Anthony D. Romero ACLU ; Ari B. Bloomekatz ; Bill McClellan ; Bob Woodward ; Camilla Cavendish ; Caroline Fredrickson ACLU ; Carolyn Tuft ; CBS Evening News ; Chicago Tribune ; Chris Fusco ; CHRISTINE CHRISTINE BYERS ; Christopher Beam ; Daniel Politi Politi ; David Savage ; David G. Jeep ; Editor TomPaine.com ; editor@californiachronicle.com; Eidtor American Chronical ; Federal City ; FeedBack Human Rights First ; Genral Manager ; Irene Haskins ; J Mannies ; James Janega ; Jason Rosenbaum ; Jeff Coen ; Jeremy Kohler ; Joe Mahr ; John Kass ; KansasCityStar ; KMOV-TV ; "Ktvinews@Foxtv. Com" ; Lake Sun Leader DAILY ; Laura Meckler ; Letters to the Editor The New York Times ; Letters to the Editor ; Letters to the Editor ; Los Angeles Times ; Mary DeLach-Leonard ; McClatchy Newspapers News TIP ; Mike Wallace <60m@cbsnews.com>; Mike Christian at 314-280-5222 FBI Report ; MSNBC on the Internet ; My Turn Editor Newsweek ; News Tip BBC ; News Tip CNN ; News Tribune Jefferson City ; Newsweek ; "Patrick M. O'Connell" ; Peace Economy News ; Pete Bland ; PressRelease politico.com ; Robert Patrick ; Sky News ; Slate Magazine ; Southeast Missourian ; St. Louis Business Journal ; St. Louis Justice and Shares ; Staff Caught.net ; STEPHEN STEPHEN DEERE ; Steve Chapman ; Sunday Morning CBS ; Tami Abdollah ; The Editors ; The Joplin Globe Publishing Company ; TheSpringfieldNews-Leader
Sent: Fri, July 9, 2010 10:33:12 AM
Subject: To Kill a Mocking Bird,
Thanks in advance,
"We live in a Lawless Society...
Time is of the essence".
David G. Jeep
http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/
Dave@DGJeep.com
DGJeep@DGJeep.com
