Dennis N. Smith Re: A Dissenting Opinion Case No.: 03FC-12243, 03FC-10670M & ED85754

Sunday January 30, 2006


Honorable Dennis N. Smith Associate Circuit Judge
Division 40 Courts Building, 2nd Floor
7900 Carondelet
Clayton, MO 63105

Telephone Number: 314-615-1540
Fax Telephone Number: 314-615-2689

Re: A Dissenting Opinion Case No.: 03FC-12243, 03FC-10670M & ED85754

Dear Sir,

Sir, and use the term only because of respect for what your office should represent. I know because I speak English and you only acknowledge the jargon of legalese that you will of course ignore this, nonetheless, I will give you fair warning.

I realize that Due Process for a Man in St. Louis County Divorce is a luxury only a lucky few get to enjoy. I say that because there are Judges, such as you, that cover up for the criminal bias of their partners in crime. You made a comment in court the other day during my hearing with full knowledge of the denial of due process, I paraphrase not having the court transcript at hand, “If I allowed this then anyone that disputes their “judgment” could claim corruption to attempt to over turn an unfavorable ruling.” To that I say so be it, “Due Process” should prevail at all cost. We let known criminals walk because evidence was obtained outside the bounds of “Due Process”. I say any Judgment be it Civil or Criminal based on a denial of “Due Process” should be overturned.

If my experience is so common then again I say, “So be it, overturn them all.” If Judges are routinely able to circumvent “Due Process” with biased bureaucratically uncontestable rulings in support of fraudulent claims, then I say so be it. “Due Process” is fundamental to our system of justice. I know for a fact that the Adult Abuse Protection Orders have and continue to be used to terrify and unduly penalize men going through a divorce. And you must agree if this type of thing is as prevalent as you see it to be, “anyone,” then the entire corrupted establishment of the St. Louis County Circuit Court needs to be brought down. The rule of law in this country under this constitution stands on a foundation of “Due Process.” If “Due Process” is not integral to the application of the law, then the whole system is biased and corrupt. And yes the whole system needs to come down.

I am in construction sir; I build for a living. If I were to knowingly allow a corrupted foundation to be built. If I had knowledge that there was bad soil or bad concrete in place; everything I put in on top of it would be suspect by the corrupt foundation. And when the building fell down as the result of the corrupted foundation, I would personably be held criminally liable for any losses resulting from the corruption.

And thus I will hold you and all other parties that have responsibility for overseeing “Due Process” in this regard criminally liable. The idea that you are exempt from responsibility because you enforce the law is morally bankrupt. No man is above the law, no man can be allowed to act irresponsibly without regard to the rights of others. We live in a society sir and we ALL have to abide by its rules.

In this democratic society there is no such thing as a “divine right” all men are equal all men are thus limited by the equal rights we grant ourselves and others. No man or woman has more human or civil or constitutional rights than any other. We have fought numerous wars and have invested untold number of lives to maintain this Freedom this equality. I do not see where St. Louis County is exempted from this?

You and your fellow judges have corrupted my good name, and I will with my last dying breath be working to peaceably over throw you and your breed of corrupt government official. I will not willing allow my son to be told I abused his mother, I will not allow my father’s name to sullied by undisputed fraudulent lies. And I will in the end prevail, because the truth is infinitely more powerful than any lie, good will always prevail over evil in the end.

Time is of the essences.

Dave@DGJeep.com

David G. Jeep

cc: The State of Missouri Court of Appeals, ED85754, (fax 314-539-4324)
Supreme Court of Missouri, (fax 573-751-7514)
James Robinson, Attorney for the Petitioner (fax (636) 530-6805)
David Shaller, GAL (fax (314) 725-2807)
Philip E. Jones, Division 65 (fax (314) 615-7868)
Cynthia Kluzak, St. Louis Family Court (fax (314) 615-7264)
Tom W. DePriest, Jr., Circuit Judge, Adm. Judge (fax (314) 615-4519)
Barbara W. Wallace, Circuit Judge, Presiding Judge (fax (314) 615-8280)
The St. Louis Post Dispatch, Editorial Department (fax 314-340-3103)
The Riverfront Times, Editorial Department (fax 314-754-5955)
The Kansas City Star, Editorial Department ( letters@kcstar.com )
Dennis N. Smith, Division 40, (fax (314) 615-2689)
The Springfield News Leader, Editorial Deprt.(webeditor@newsleader.com )
The Daily Capital News, Editorial Department

Presiding Judge January 9, 2006

I am scared to death. I am about to walk into a courtroom where a citizen’s rights to Due Process to fairness are all subject to the arbitrary and openly biased whims of a would be judge.

Tuesday, December 27, 2005

 “An open letter to whom it may concern” & Phillip E. Jones Sr

Family Court Division 65,

7900 Carondelet

Clayton, MO  63105

Re:  Open letter to whom it may concern

        Jeep v. Jeep 03FC-10670(M), 03FC-12243 and

Dear P. E Jones,

I am scared to death.  I am about to walk into a courtroom where a citizen’s rights to Due Process to fairness are all subject to the arbitrary and openly biased whims of a would be judge.  I have experience.  I have been here before.  At the origination of this issue I walked into this courtroom represented by council and accused of a traffic violation and was stripped of everything, I stress EVERYTHING was stripped from me.  I was forced out of my $250,000 home and into the street virtually naked.  I was not AFFORDED due process.

This included my rights to paternity, to property, to privacy and to liberty.  He, the would be judge, Commissioner Jones took it all without regard to my right to due process or the legal opinion he is legally required to produce as an explanation for his illegal action.  He acted arbitrarily and without accountability.  I asked his immediate superior, Associate Judge Goeke.  I asked the courts presiding Judges Wallace and DePriest to step in, assert their authority over this renegade judge, and reestablish due process.  They ignore me.  I have on numerous occasions since asked for an explanation of this illegal and biased ruling.  He and his cronies, his bosses, his supposed superiors have continually covered up and denied my request for this opinion and thus denied my rights to paternity, property, privacy and liberty.

Since that time Commissioner Jones has continually, without regard to his illegal denial of my rights to fair Due Process, heaped fines, support payments, court cost, and ultimately the cost for the Petitioner’s legal fees on me even though I had no ability to pay.  I am virtually bankrupt.  I cannot afford an attorney myself the petitioner has illegally via a biased judge has stolen my paternity, my financial resources, my assets, and my privacy.  The petitioner has illegally, for the last 26 months, taken soul paternity rights of my son and possession of all the marital physical assets and cash on hand.  I say illegally because the petitioner knows there was no abuse, she has perpetrated a fraud on the court and me, this in conjunction with the denial of my rights to expose her fraud via due process.

Even now I am forced due to a biased settlement to pay her legal fees because I had attempted to assert my legal rights to property, paternity, privacy and liberty because of the illegal biased denial of my constitutional rights to due process by the would be Judge. 

Now I am about to step into the would be judge’s lair again.  I am asking that I be allowed access to my property because the petitioner has made no efforts to date to make the biased settlement of my assets to me.  She has because of the illegal denial of my rights had unfettered control of all the marital assets for 26 months, kept me virtually in jail.  She has attempted with the support of an incompetent GAL and without regard to my legal rights to paternity attempted to turn my son into a drug addict. 

The current charge has no specifics attached to it.  The charge should be dismissed outright because it’s of the lack of specifics.  I am afraid of a renegade judge.  I am afraid of being accused of something I will be literally be blindsided by as I was before.  I ask you to bear witness to this continued denial of my rights.  If they get away with it here, they will someday come for you also.  We all need to be vigilant and aware of our rights and yes fight even though we bare no weapons to maintain them in the face of the evil powers that would deny them.

The current charges will be heard on 1/3/05 (this date should have been 1/3/06) at 7:30am in division 65 of the St. Louis County Court house.  Please attend if you can.

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.

David G. Jeep

David G. Jeep

cc: Presiding Judge Barbara W. Wallace via fax 314-615-8280

      The State of Missouri Court of Appeals, ED85754, (fax 314-539-4324)

      Supreme Court of Missouri, (fax 573-751-7514)

      Joseph A. Goeke, Associate Circuit Judge, (fax (314) 615-2689)

      James Robinson, Attorney for the Petitioner (fax (636) 530-6805)

      David Shaller, GAL (fax (314) 725-2807)

      Philip E. Jones, Division 65 (fax (314) 615-7868)

      Cynthia Kluzak, St. Louis Family Court (fax (314) 615-7264)

      Tom W. DePriest, Jr., Circuit Judge, Adm. Judge (fax (314) 615-4519)

      Barbara W. Wallace, Circuit Judge, Presiding Judge (fax (314) 615-8280)

      The St. Louis Post Dispatch, Editorial Department (fax 314-340-3103)

      The Riverfront Times, Editorial Department (fax 314-754-5955)

      The Kansas City Star, Editorial Department ( letters@kcstar.com )

       file

       

Motion for removal and Notice of Intent to fiel appeal

Pro Se
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE COUNTY OF ST. LOUIS
STATE OF MISSOURI

Sharon Gayle Jeep, (SSN#)Petitioner,
and
David Gerard Jeep, (SSN#)Respondent

Case No.: 03FC-10670M & 03FC-12243 Presiding Judge of Division 65

Respondent's Motion for Removal of Commissioner Jones in regard to this issue And a Motion to preserve Respondent’s rights of appeal due to a judgment asserted by a Corrupt Judiciary and a Fraudulent Petition Support by the aforementioned Corrupted Judiciary

COMES NOW Respondent, David G. Jeep, and moves this Court to remove Commissioner Jones in the above referenced issues and to preserve his right of appeal based on the initial denial and the subsequent denial of this courts continued ILLEGAL rulings.

1. On 11/19/03 the Respondent was illegally denied Access to due process

2. Numerous motions were put forward both by certified members of the Bar and by the respondent on his own behalf. A citizen should not have to ask for his rights. Right are not awarded, RIGHTS by definition can not be taken away, they cannot be denied. If rights are denied it is ILLEGAL. If I held someone against there will and denied them access to there property it would be theft, kidnapping and or slavery. I will be filing formal charges of theft, kidnapping and white slavery against the Commissioner Jones and his cronies.

3. If a Commissioner, a would be judge and or a Judge Rule without affording all parties their right to due process they are breaking the law.

4. Commissioner Jones admitted in my presence and in the presents of others that he had made mistake, that there was nothing to warrant an Order of Protection. Nonetheless in spite of his illegal denial of my rights and in spite of his admitted mistake he continued to enforce his corrupt, illegal ruling. I for one think that that makes Criminally libel for his actions.

5. I will be filing charges of fraud and theft against the petitioner and her would be attorney. That is once I again get access to my fraudulently denied right to my liberty and my property

6. If the courts act illegally, the courts need to be exposed as criminals they are. All the petitions for my right to due process were summarily and illegally denied by Commissioner Jones in attempt to cover up his misconduct and his incompetence and his illegal abuse of his judicial authority. Commissioner Jones has continuously denied the Respondent his right to his property, to his paternity, to his liberty, to his everything.

7. The Respondent has been illegally denied access to all of his possessions
for nearly 2 years because of this CORRUPT ruling by Commissioner Jones.

8. The Respondent’s Child has been forced to into drug dependency without regard to the Respondents rights nor the rights of the child.

9. There has never been a threat of violence nor and act of violence by the respondent. Yet the basis for the entire issue is an illegally enforced order of protection.

10. Yes the Respondent has peacefully attempted on 2 occasions to recover his fraudulently stolen belongings.

11. There was one attempt to get custody of the child for the Respondent and yes I did knock on the door because petitioner would not answer the door and because my wife had taken the child outside of her rights under then in place custody order.

12. On 12/19/04 the respondent was denied his right to due process because the aforementioned BIASED Commissioner sat in judgment and his subsequent ruling based on unsupported suspect perjurious testimony presented by the Petitioner.

13. Now nearly 12 months after the Commissioner’s Biased decree the Petitioner has made no effort to settle the Fraudulent, Biased Judgment for fear of my APPEAL. The Petitioner was award everything I owned and has had unencumbered use of EVERYTHING I owned without regard to my rights of ownership, all without the Respondent being afford access to due process.

14. The Respondent has made motions that the custody order afford the Petitioner gave too much in terms of monetary support and that the support was inhibiting the respondents right to his property.



______________________________________
This Tuesday December 13, 2005
Pro SeDavid G. Jeep, Respondent16359D Lakefield Place DriveGrover, MO 63040 314-277-5904

Respondent's Motion for Removal of Commissioner Jones in regard to this issue And a Motion to preserve Respondent’s rights of appeal due to a judgment asserted by a Corrupt Judiciary and a Fraudulent Petition Support by the aforementioned Corrupted Judiciary

Pro Se

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE COUNTY OF ST. LOUIS

STATE OF MISSOURI

Sharon Gayle Jeep, (SSN)                         Petitioner,                         and David Gerard Jeep, (SSN)                         Respondent

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case No.: 03FC-10670M & 03FC-12243 Presiding Judge of Division 65

Respondent's Motion for Removal of Commissioner Jones in regard to this issue And a Motion to preserve Respondent’s rights of appeal due to a judgment asserted by a Corrupt Judiciary and a Fraudulent Petition Support by the aforementioned Corrupted Judiciary

COMES NOW Respondent, David G. Jeep, and moves this Court to remove Commissioner Jones in the above referenced issues and to preserve his right of appeal based on the initial denial and the subsequent denial of this courts continued ILLEGAL rulings.

1. On 11/19/03 the Respondent was illegally denied Access to due process
2. Numerous motions were put forward both by certified members of the Bar and by the respondent on his own behalf.  A citizen should not have to ask for his rights.  Right are not awarded, RIGHTS by definition can not be taken away, they cannot be denied.  If rights are denied it is ILLEGAL.  If I held someone against there will and denied them access to there property it would be theft, kidnapping and or slavery.  I will be filing formal charges of theft, kidnapping and white slavery against the Commissioner Jones and his cronies. 
3. If a Commissioner, a would be judge and or a Judge Rule without affording all parties their right to due process they are breaking the law.
4. Commissioner Jones admitted in my presence and in the presents of others that he had made mistake, that there was nothing to warrant an Order of Protection.  Nonetheless in spite of his illegal denial of my rights and in spite of his admitted mistake he continued to enforce his corrupt, illegal ruling.  I for one think that that makes Criminally libel for his actions.
5. I will be filing charges of fraud and theft against the petitioner and her would be attorney.  That is once I again get access to my fraudulently denied right to my liberty and my property
6. If the courts act illegally, the courts need to be exposed as criminals they are.  All the petitions for my right to due process were summarily and illegally denied by Commissioner Jones in attempt to cover up his misconduct and his incompetence and his illegal abuse of his judicial authority.  Commissioner Jones has continuously denied the Respondent his right to his property, to his paternity, to his liberty, to his everything.
7. The Respondent has been illegally denied access to all of his possessions for nearly 2 years because of this CORRUPT ruling by Commissioner Jones.
8. The Respondent’s Child has been forced to into drug dependency without regard to the Respondents rights nor the rights of the child.
9. There has never been a threat of violence nor and act of violence by the respondent.  Yet the basis for the entire issue is an illegally enforced order of protection.
10. Yes the Respondent has peacefully attempted on 2 occasions to recover his fraudulently stolen belongings.
11. There was one attempt to get custody of the child for the Respondent and yes I did knock on the door because petitioner would not answer the door and because my wife had taken the child outside of her rights under then in place custody order.
12.  On 12/19/04 the respondent was denied his right to due process because the aforementioned BIASED Commissioner sat in judgment and his subsequent ruling based on unsupported suspect perjurious testimony presented by the Petitioner.
13. Now nearly 12 months after the Commissioner’s Biased decree the Petitioner has made no effort to settle the Fraudulent, Biased Judgment for fear of my APPEAL.  The Petitioner was award everything I owned and has had unencumbered use of EVERYTHING I owned without regard to my rights of ownership, all without the Respondent being afford access to due process.  
14. The Respondent has made motions that the custody order afford the Petitioner gave too much in terms of monetary support and that the support was inhibiting the respondents right to his property.

                                                                                    ______________________________________

This Tuesday December 13, 2005

Pro Se David G. Jeep, Respondent 16359D Lakefield Place Drive Grover, MO 63040                                       314-277-5904

Missouri State Highway Patrol, Re: Report of a crime and a request for an investigation

January 20, 2005

Missouri State Highway Patrol
General Headquarters
1510 E. Elm Street
Jefferson City, MO 65102

(573) 751-3313

Re: Case # CR203-1336M, SD26269
Report of a crime and a request for an investigation

Dear Sirs,

I have been referred to you by the supreme court of Missouri. I have to date spent nearly $5,000 on my defense regarding a charge of DWI as referenced above. I am sure that you question anyone’s assertion of innocence to the charge. But all men are considered innocent until given right to due process and proven guilty in a court of law. When the police lie, the prosecutors suborn perjury and the judge looks the other way is there any justice?

I was charged on 5/16/03 somewhere just after midnight. I was not drunk, I had not put anyone at risk. The arresting officer pulled me over for failing to use my blinker as I crossed the center lane of a virtually empty road as I entered the highway via a left turn. I was not belligerent, I was not disorderly. I submitted for the breathalyzer test. I blew steadily for 15 seconds, the result was in valid.

I submitted for the field sobriety test battery, I supposedly failed. I did not fall down I was just a little unsteady. I failed while I was wearing cowboy boots. See the enclosed prisoners receipt for a pair of boots and other miscellaneous. The standard procedures for the test as set by NHSTA, state that anyone wearing a 2” heal or higher should be offered the chance to remove the shoes prior to the test being administered. I was not afforded that opportunity.

I could not afford an attorney. I had quotes that started at $10,000 for a defense against this charge. Needless to say, again, I could not afford a lawyer.

While attending to pretrial issues in Camden County the Judge at the time one Jack A. Bennett had me thrown in jail. There was never even so much as an explanation offered as to why I was put in jail in the courtroom. Later I was told by the Bailiff that I was being held because I had driven myself to court and that was an illegal act in that because of my asserted refusal my license had been revoked.

My wife had driven me to court that day. She had taken off work and taken my son out of school to do so. She had driven me down to Camden County. No one would listen to me. When I contacted a bail bondsman he put up my bail and spoke on my behalf. The Judge released me the following evening after posting another bail.

Needles to say I was very upset. I explored my options. I was told I could appeal the judges ruling. Again to appeal a judges ruling is an extremely expensive alternative. I could not afford a lawyer. I filed a grievance with the Commission on Retirement, Removal and Discipline of Judges, as is any citizen’s right. See the enclosed copies of the letters dated 10/08/03, and addressed in that regard. When you read the letter you will see that I have stated my case and I enclosed copies of receipts from my wife substantiating her presences in Camden County on the morning in question.

That formed the motive for what became a conspiracy involving Judge Bennett, Judge Colyer, The Prosecuting Attorneys, Mr. W. Steven Rives & Mr. W. James Icenogle, and the two arresting police officers, Alex Little & Tim Taylor to convict me at whatever cost.

At my trail before a jury, the two arresting police officers lied under oath. Alex Little lied in that he asserted that it was a 4” heal that required prior offer of removal. This is in direct contradiction to the standard. And if you have any knowledge of shoes, a 4” heel is just so unusual as to be unworthy of reference. Nonetheless, the jury seeing the officer offer it as fact took it as fact. A police officer that should have known is business, a police officer that would never lie, lied. The jury was swayed.

I had made several motions prior to the trail trying to get the Standard utilized by the State of Missouri. The prosecuting attorney had stated that the NHTSA standard was what was used, but they would not provide me a copy. The prosecuting attorneys new what my defense revolved around. Thus it is my assertion that the Prosecuting Attorneys either prepped the officer regarding the issue and told them how to lie or they condoned what they new to be an officer of the court committing perjury on the stand and they supported and thus suborned perjury.

The second officer Tim Taylor lied in direct contradiction to his prior sworn statement on the police report. Tim Taylor stated repeatedly that I had not blown for the 15 seconds he had referenced on his sworn police report. A police officer that should have known is business, a police officer that would never lie, lied. The jury was swayed.

Because the prosecuting attorneys had the police report and because I had made motions prior to the trial that the Breathalyzer test should be thrown out as a refusal because it was an invalid. At trial I had the State of Missouri’s Health Department authority on the Breathalyzer give sworn testimony that a breathalyzer blow should take between 5 and 17 seconds, see the court record enclosed. Again the prosecuting attorney knew of the police report. Thus it is my assertion that the Prosecuting Attorneys either prepped the officer regarding the issue and told them how to lie or they condoned what they new to be an officer of the court committing perjury on the stand and they supported and thus suborned perjury. And for whatever reason the police report was not entered into evidence, and in my naive defense I thought that it had been.

Finally after the jury struggled with the verdict for nearly 6 hours, well into the night and rendered their verdict of guilty. After the trial and prior to sentencing I brought all theses issue of supporting and suborning perjury by officers of the court, Judge Colyer, refused to use his judicial discretion to right this wrong. And thus is complicit in the conspiracy.

Thus Judge Bennett is guilty for having first made the illegal judgment against me during the pretrial and then instigating my conviction by calling on friendship and cronyism to convict me. The prosecuting attorneys are guilty for prepping for, supporting and suborning perjury. The police officers are guilty of perjury, and finally Judge Coyler is guilty of looking the other way while this conspiracy is going on and doing nothing to stop it.

If you questions on any of these issue, you can contact the jury foreperson for cooperation. There is a list of the jury’s names in the court file, I have a list of the jury’s names.

For your reference I am including here copies of the letters referenced above and electronic copy of the trial’s transcript (filename SD26269) and copies of all the pretrial motions and letters I generated in this regard on CD. If there is anything more I can do for you in this regard, please let me know. Please if you would investigate and keep me informed as to the status.

Time is of the essence.

Regards,



David G. Jeep
enclosure
cc: file

Commission on Retirement, Removal and Discipline of Judges

January 20, 2005

Commission on Retirement, Removal and Discipline of Judges
2190 South Mason Road
St. Louis, Missouri 63131

(314) 966-1007 (phone)
(314) 966-0076 (fax)

Re: Case # CR203-1336M, SD26269
Report of a crime and a request for an investigation

Dear Sirs,
I have been referred to you by the supreme court of Missouri. I have to date spent nearly $5,000 on my defense regarding a charge of DWI as referenced above. I am sure that you question anyone’s assertion of innocence to the charge. But all men are considered innocent until given right to due process and proven guilty in a court of law. When the police lie, the prosecutors suborn perjury and the judge looks the other way is there any justice?

I was charged on 5/16/03 somewhere just after midnight. I was not drunk, I had not put anyone at risk. The arresting officer pulled me over for failing to use my blinker as I crossed the center lane of a virtually empty road as I entered the highway via a left turn. I was not belligerent, I was not disorderly. I submitted for the breathalyzer test. I blew steadily for 15 seconds, the result was in valid.

I submitted for the field sobriety test battery, I supposedly failed. I did not fall down I was just a little unsteady. I failed while I was wearing cowboy boots. See the enclosed prisoners receipt for a pair of boots and other miscellaneous. The standard procedures for the test as set by NHSTA, state that anyone wearing a 2” heal or higher should be offered the chance to remove the shoes prior to the test being administered. I was not afforded that opportunity.

I could not afford an attorney. I had quotes that started at $10,000 for a defense against this charge. Needless to say, again, I could not afford a lawyer.

While attending to pretrial issues in Camden County the Judge at the time one Jack A. Bennett had me thrown in jail. There was never even so much as an explanation offered as to why I was put in jail in the courtroom. Later I was told by the Bailiff that I was being held because I had driven myself to court and that was an illegal act in that because of my asserted refusal my license had been revoked.

My wife had driven me to court that day. She had taken off work and taken my son out of school to do so. She had driven me down to Camden County. No one would listen to me. When I contacted a bail bondsman he put up my bail and spoke on my behalf. The Judge released me the following evening after posting another bail.

Needles to say I was very upset. I explored my options. I was told I could appeal the judges ruling. Again to appeal a judges ruling is an extremely expensive alternative. I could not afford a lawyer. I filed a grievance with the Commission on Retirement, Removal and Discipline of Judges, as is any citizen’s right.

See the enclosed copies of the letters dated 10/08/03, and addressed in that regard. When you read the letter you will see that I have stated my case and I enclosed copies of receipts from my wife substantiating her presences in Camden County on the morning in question.

That formed the motive for what became a conspiracy involving Judge Bennett, Judge Colyer, The Prosecuting Attorneys, Mr. W. Steven Rives & Mr. W. James Icenogle, and the two arresting police officers, Alex Little & Tim Taylor to convict me at whatever cost.

At my trail before a jury, the two arresting police officers lied under oath. Alex Little lied in that he asserted that it was a 4” heal that required prior offer of removal. This is in direct contradiction to the standard. And if you have any knowledge of shoes, a 4” heel is just so unusual as to be unworthy of reference.

Nonetheless, the jury seeing the officer offer it as fact took it as fact. A police officer that should have known is business, a police officer that would never lie, lied. The jury was swayed.

I had made several motions prior to the trail trying to get the Standard utilized by the State of Missouri. The prosecuting attorney had stated that the NHTSA standard was what was used, but they would not provide me a copy. The prosecuting attorneys new what my defense revolved around. Thus it is my assertion that the Prosecuting Attorneys either prepped the officer regarding the issue and told them how to lie or they condoned what they new to be an officer of the court committing perjury on the stand and they supported and thus suborned perjury.

The second officer Tim Taylor lied in direct contradiction to his prior sworn statement on the police report. Tim Taylor stated repeatedly that I had not blown for the 15 seconds he had referenced on his sworn police report. A police officer that should have known is business, a police officer that would never lie, lied. The jury was swayed.

Because the prosecuting attorneys had the police report and because I had made motions prior to the trial that the Breathalyzer test should be thrown out as a refusal because it was an invalid. At trial I had the State of Missouri’s Health Department authority on the Breathalyzer give sworn testimony that a breathalyzer blow should take between 5 and 17 seconds, see the court record enclosed. Again the prosecuting attorney knew of the police report. Thus it is my assertion that the Prosecuting Attorneys either prepped the officer regarding the issue and told them how to lie or they condoned what they new to be an officer of the court committing perjury on the stand and they supported and thus suborned perjury. And for whatever reason the police report was not entered into evidence, and in my naive defense I thought that it had been.

Finally after the jury struggled with the verdict for nearly 6 hours, well into the night and rendered their verdict of guilty. After the trial and prior to sentencing I brought all theses issue of supporting and suborning perjury by officers of the court, Judge Colyer, refused to use his judicial discretion to right this wrong. And thus is complicit in the conspiracy.
Thus Judge Bennett is guilty for having first made the illegal judgment against me during the pretrial and then instigating my conviction by calling on friendship and cronyism to convict me. The prosecuting attorneys are guilty for prepping for, supporting and suborning perjury. The police officers are guilty of perjury, and finally Judge Coyler is guilty of looking the other way while this conspiracy is going on and doing nothing to stop it.

If you questions on any of these issue, you can contact the jury foreperson for cooperation. There is a list of the jury’s names in the court file, I have a list of the jury’s names.

For your reference I am including here copies of the letters referenced above and electronic copy of the trial’s transcript (filename SD26269) and copies of all the pretrial motions and letters I generated in this regard on CD. If there is anything more I can do for you in this regard, please let me know. Please if you would investigate and keep me informed as to the status. Time is of the essence.
Regards,



David G. Jeep
enclosure
cc: file

Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel, Case # CR203-1336M, SD26269, Report of a crime and a request for an investigation

January 20, 2005

                       

Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel

3335 American Avenue

Jefferson City, MO   65109-1079

                       

Re:   Case # CR203-1336M, SD26269

         Report of a crime and a request for an investigation

                       

Dear Sirs,

I have been referred to you by the supreme court of Missouri.  I have to date spent nearly $5,000 on my defense regarding a charge of DWI as referenced above.   I am sure that you question anyone’s assertion of innocence to the charge.  But all men are considered innocent until given right to due process and proven guilty in a court of law.  When the police lie, the prosecutors suborn perjury and the judge looks the other way is there any justice?

I was charged on 5/16/03 somewhere just after midnight.  I was not drunk, I had not put anyone at risk.  The arresting officer pulled me over for failing to use my blinker as I crossed the center lane of a virtually empty road as I entered the highway via a left turn.  I was not belligerent, I was not disorderly.  I submitted for the breathalyzer test. I blew steadily for 15 seconds, the result was in valid. 

I submitted for the field sobriety test battery, I supposedly failed.  I did not fall down I was just a little unsteady.  I failed while I was wearing cowboy boots.  See the enclosed prisoners receipt for a pair of boots and other miscellaneous.  The standard procedures for the test as set by NHSTA, state that anyone wearing a 2” heal or higher should be offered the chance to remove the shoes prior to the test being administered.  I was not afforded that opportunity. 

I could not afford an attorney. I had quotes that started at $10,000 for a defense against this charge.  Needless to say, again, I could not afford a lawyer.

While attending to pretrial issues in Camden County the Judge at the time one Jack A. Bennett had me thrown in jail.  There was never even so much as an explanation offered as to why I was put in jail in the courtroom.  Later I was told by the Bailiff that I was being held because I had driven myself to court and that was an illegal act in that because of my asserted refusal my license had been revoked. 

My wife had driven me to court that day.  She had taken off work and taken my son out of school to do so.  She had driven me down to Camden County.  No one would listen to me.  When I contacted a bail bondsman he put up my bail and spoke on my behalf.  The Judge released me the following evening after posting another bail. 

Needles to say I was very upset.  I explored my options.  I was told I could appeal the judges ruling.  Again to appeal a judges ruling is an extremely expensive alternative.  I could not afford a lawyer.  I filed a grievance with the Commission on Retirement, Removal and Discipline of Judges, as is any citizen’s right.  See the enclosed copies of the letters dated 10/08/03, and addressed in that regard.  When you read the letter you will see that I have stated my case and I enclosed copies of receipts from my wife substantiating her presences in Camden County on the morning in question.

That formed the motive for what became a conspiracy involving Judge Bennett, Judge Colyer, The Prosecuting Attorneys, Mr. W. Steven Rives & Mr. W. James Icenogle, and the two arresting police officers, Alex Little & Tim Taylor to convict me at whatever cost.

At my trail before a jury, the two arresting police officers lied under oath.  Alex Little lied in that he asserted that it was a 4” heal that required prior offer of removal.  This is in direct contradiction to the standard.  And if you have any knowledge of shoes, a 4” heel is just so unusual as to be unworthy of reference.  Nonetheless, the jury seeing the officer offer it as fact took it as fact.  A police officer that should have known is business, a police officer that would never lie, lied.  The jury was swayed.

I had made several motions prior to the trail trying to get the Standard utilized by the State of Missouri.  The prosecuting attorney had stated that the NHTSA standard was what was used, but they would not provide me a copy.  The prosecuting attorneys new what my defense revolved around.  Thus it is my assertion that the Prosecuting Attorneys either prepped the officer regarding the issue and told them how to lie or they condoned what they new to be an officer of the court committing perjury on the stand and they supported and thus suborned perjury.  

The second officer Tim Taylor lied in direct contradiction to his prior sworn statement on the police report.  Tim Taylor stated repeatedly that I had not blown for the 15 seconds he had referenced on his sworn police report.  A police officer that should have known is business, a police officer that would never lie, lied.  The jury was swayed.

Because the prosecuting attorneys had the police report and because I had made motions prior to the trial that the Breathalyzer test should be thrown out as a refusal because it was an invalid.  At trial I had the State of Missouri’s Health Department authority on the Breathalyzer give sworn testimony that a breathalyzer blow should take between 5 and 17 seconds, see the court record enclosed.  Again the prosecuting attorney knew of the police report.  Thus it is my assertion that the Prosecuting Attorneys either prepped the officer regarding the issue and told them how to lie or they condoned what they new to be an officer of the court committing perjury on the stand and they supported and thus suborned perjury.  And for whatever reason the police report was not entered into evidence, and in my naive defense I thought that it had been.   

Finally after the jury struggled with the verdict for nearly 6 hours, well into the night and rendered their verdict of guilty.  After the trial and prior to sentencing I brought all theses issue of supporting and suborning perjury by officers of the court, Judge Colyer, refused to use his judicial discretion to right this wrong.  And thus is complicit in the conspiracy.

Thus Judge Bennett is guilty for having first made the illegal judgment against me during the pretrial and then instigating my conviction by calling on friendship and cronyism to convict me.  The prosecuting attorneys are guilty for prepping for, supporting and suborning perjury.  The police officers are guilty of perjury, and finally Judge Coyler is guilty of looking the other way while this conspiracy is going on and doing nothing to stop it.

If you questions on any of these issue, you can contact the jury foreperson for cooperation.  There is a list of the jury’s names in the court file, I have a list of the jury’s names.

For your reference I am including here copies of the letters referenced above and electronic copy of the trial’s transcript (filename SD26269) and copies of all the pretrial motions and letters I generated in this regard on CD.  If there is anything more I can do for you in this regard, please let me know.  Please if you would investigate and keep me informed as to the status.  Time is of the essence.

Regards,

Replay to Dave@DGJeep.com

David G. Jeep

enclosure

cc: file

Findings of Fact And proposed settlement in regard to the dissolution of marriage in the above referenced case.

Pro Se

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE COUNTY OF ST. LOUIS

STATE OF MISSOURI

In re the Marriage of: Sharon Gayle Jeep, (SSN#XXX-XX-XXX)                         Petitioner,             and David Gerard Jeep, (SSN#XXX-XX-XXX)                         Respondent

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case No.: 03FC-12243 No. 65

Findings of Fact

And proposed settlement in regard to the dissolution of marriage in the above referenced case.

COMES NOW the Respondent, David G. Jeep, and moves this Court to consider these facts as basis for its decision in regard to the dissolution of marriage and settlement of custody and all financial issues.

Respondent states as follows:

1. First and foremost among the facts for the respondent are the continuing and ongoing judicial malfeasants of Commissioner Phillip E. Jones as related to the respondent’s right to Due Process regarding this issue.  The Commissioner has consistently and without foundation denied the respondent his rights to due process, paternity, property and liberty. 
2. The respondent and the petitioner are now and have both been residents of St. Louis County in the state of Missouri for the last 15 years.
3. The respondent and the petitioner were married in St. Louis County on June 16, 1989.
4. There was one child of this union Patrick Brandon Jeep born 12-22-94, (SS#XXX-XX-XXX)
5. The differences between the parties are irreconcilable and the marriage is irretrievably broken and should be dissolved.
6. Facts to be considered in the settlement of the custody of the minor child and financial issues are as follows:
7. The petitioner’s continued unfounded assertion of abuse has cost the respondent 13 month of his life.
8. The courts continued denial of the Respondent’s rights to due process has contributed to the respondents being denied his rights as a parent, being forced from his home of 10 years and allowing the petitioner to literally steal all that he once held precious.  There was no credible collaboration of the charges of abuse.  There was merely an emotional assertion and a judge unwilling to do his job and oversee a credible judicial system of DUE PROCESS.  The judge as is if asserting his adolescent manhood abusively forced the respondent into compliance again without access to standards of due process.
9. The petitioner’s unfounded assertions of abuse were upheld by the Commissioner at the expense of the respondent’s rights to due process.
10.  The specifics for the charges of abuse were changed on the morning in the midst of the accelerated 2 hour trial regarding the order of protection. 
11. The Petitioner was represented by legal council.  Said council lead the petitioner via his cross examination to assert charges different form the original allegation.  He therefore had prior knowledge of the revised charges. 
12. His legal tactics were in direct conflict with the canons of legal ethics and he should be sanctioned for his fraudulent misuse of the legal process.
13. The respondent via his attorney made a timely objection.  Said objection was arbitrarily over ruled without foundation by the commissioner.
14. The Commissioner then allowed testimony on the issue without giving the respondent adequate time to neither prepare a defense nor depose witnesses in regard to the new charge.
15. Thus the commissioner’s ruling was thus flawed.  Any subsequent ruling having a basis in or related to said ruling is thus flawed.
16. The respondent has since making known his objection at trial, has filed two motions for a retrial on the issue, which were summarily denied by the commissioner without foundation or comment.  The Respondent has also filed two motions requesting the commissioner to recuse himself because of this judicial misconduct and refusal to afford the petitioner his rights to due process and thus his rights to paternity, property, and liberty.
17. The petitioner hereby asserts as a testimonial fact, that the petitioner lied in her surprise and unfounded allegations of abuse. Thus the petitioner should be held financially and criminally responsible for the consequences of her illegal act of perjury and suborning perjury with daughter.
18. Foremost among these issues is as the mother of a 20 year old female child, one Kristen Capps; she did hereby engage her as a co-conspirator in her illegal act of fraud and perjury.
19. This commission of an illegal act utilizing a progeny should be given extreme weight in the consideration of any custody order which affords the petitioner any custodial rights.
20. Said co-conspirator Kristen Capps had 6 months prior to the abuse filing, flunked out of college four semesters in row and was living the life a party girl staying out to 4:00am several days a week living off of the petitioner and the respondent.  As result of her irresponsible lifestyle and actions she had for the 5 months prior to the order of abuse been asked to move out of the couple’s home.  The request had been made by mutual agreement of the Petitioner and the Respondent and was confirmed by Kristen’s Grandmother Reiko Page, her aunt Paula Shaw, her aunt Carolyn Cravens, her aunt Theresa Page, her uncle Michael Page and her uncle Dodson Cravens.  Just prior to the abuse order Kristen Capps had been fired from her job, her car had broken down beyond repair and the family she was living, one Dave Wangrow a St. Louis County police officer, had insisted she move out.  These are the facts and they are not disputed.
21. She was thus without a job, without transportation, without a home and was about to be living on the street, thus she was ripe for the petitioner to use in her conspiracy to suborn perjury to defraud the respondent of his paternity, his property and his liberty.
22. And again she was able to commit this fraud because the court would not allow the respondent his constitutional rights to due process.
23. This act by a mother to engage her child in the commission of a crime is a moral issue that should be considered in any custody agreement.
24. The petitioner’s motive for the perjury was two fold first was to illegally acquire a prescription for Psychiatric Drug Therapy for the minor child over the known objection of his natural and co-custodial parent the respondent.  The second motive was to force the respondent from his home and thus defraud him of his property and ultimately his liberty.
25. Just prior to the order of abuse the Petitioner and the Respondent had consulted a pediatrician, Dr. Kent Killian, see the letter date 7/6/04 from Dr. Killian, he confirms and supported the diagnosis of Patrick’s condition “as suggestive but not conclusive of ADHD.”  At that time Dr. Killian acknowledged and supported the couples mutual agreement “NOT to TREAT him (Patrick) with medication,” see Dr. Killian’s letter dated 11/18/04.
26. Because of the petitioner’s acute issues of self esteem, she can not and will not confront nor stand up to anyone or anything.  With the soul exception of the Petitioner whom as she knows is a confirmed pacifist and would never attack nor defend with violence.  The petitioner’s self esteem issues are the result of an abusive father and her mother’s refusal to protect her.  She can not be a parent to her daughter.  Her daughter badly needs parental direction, yet her mother’s parental guidance is to indulge, indulge and corrupt her with illegal activities, perjury and fraud.
27. That being said the petitioner has an irrational fear of her son, not because he is violent, not because there are any reports of violence, but because he can be disagreeable and confrontational.  She can not handle him as he is; she needs him on Psychiatric Drug Therapy to keep him twilighted and under her control.
28. Thus any custodial time afforded her should be under strict supervision of a court appointed officer at the petitioners expense.
29. The second aspect of the petitioner’s motive revolves around the obvious, money.
30. The petitioner all during the marriage had been supported by the Respondent. The respondent had paid all the house payments, all the utility payments, virtually all the major expenses.  The petitioner had been responsible for only the household goods, food stuffs, retirement and their savings.  The petitioner had been entrusted with the savings and the retirement interests.
31. During the twenty month immediately prior to the order of protection, the Respondent had been out of work at home.  He had supported the family even then with an inheritance he had received from his family.
32.  The Respondent and the Petitioner had always both worked.  They had always made close to the same amount every year.
33. The Respondent’s money went to REAL household expenses, Mortgage, the light bill. The gas bill, the phone bill, the mobile phone bill.  The petitioner was trusted with food stuffs, household expenses, her cloths, savings and retirement. 
34. Just prior to the order of protection without due process the respondent’s money had just run out. He was without cash on hand and without a job.  For the month of September and October of 2003 the Petitioner had assumed the mortgage payment.
35. After the Order of protection the Petitioner went out and cleaned out the joint accounts.  In the Respondent’s joint account she withdrew his last $50.15.
36. It is underdetermined how much she had in her joint account in that she had been working and making in excess of $60,000 a year for the most recent 24 months and she had been trusted to be saving what she could.  Her only REAL recurring expenses had been food on the table, of which the respondent had actually purchased a great deal of because he was home working and need to be fed.
37. The respondent was thrown out on to the street with no money without access to due process.  The petitioner had complete control of all the couples savings, household property and real estate.
38. The respondent had no job, no money, no vehicle and no access to due process to redress the lies being used against him..
39. The respondent had been actively looking for work and actually landed a position with a company he had work with 10 years prior in November of 2003.
40. The petitioner thus had soul access and control of the couple’s savings.  The petitioner has irresponsibly expended those liquid savings, some $10,000, on the support of her perjury and her attempt to defraud the respondent of his paternity, his property and his liberty.
41. The petitioner having soul access to couples home for the last 13 months has stolen EVERYTHING from the RESPONDENT.  She has taken soul possession of the entire product of 48 years of the Respondent’s life, his memories, his collections, his private musing; his entire personal life has been stolen.  Imagine you are watching Monday Night Football and a policeman comes in and tells you have to leave, you have maybe thirty minutes to pack whatever you can carry, but you have 47 years of your life.  Memories of your father, memories of you family, little mementos of you childhood all stripped form you without credible access to due process.  The respondent is asking for $72,000 in compensation for the lies perpetrated by the petitioner in having stolen 13 months of the respondent’s life with her lies.
42. The respondent has not had access to his private information on his personal computer.  This is private information as private as a man’s soul can be; no one has any right this information, no one but the respondent.  There was never any thing specifically proved or asserted other than the respondent would not relinquish this most private of possessions.
43. The refusal of the court to allow the Respondent access to his computer encumbered him in the defense of his cause of action in a recent court case.  This refusal of the court to enforce a subpoena, a motion for the distribution of a marital asset, and again refusing the respondent access to his property.  The respondent will be seeking compensation for that irresponsible assertion of unfounded judicial authority with a separate action.
44. The Psychiatric Drug Therapy of a minor child is a reasonable dispute among educated rational people.  The diagnosis is “suggestive but not conclusive regarding ADHD.” I want to repeat that the diagnosis is “suggestive but not conclusive regarding ADHD.”  I want to repeat that the diagnosis is “suggestive but not conclusive regarding ADHD.”  I want to repeat that the diagnosis is “suggestive but not conclusive regard ADHD.”  This is the only direct non emotionally influenced reference to Patrick’s diagnosis by Dr. Killian
45. The petitioner per Dr. Killian after “multiple discussions” without the respondent’s knowledge or consent got the Doctor to give her the prescription.  She harassed him until he relented.
46. If in fact he has ADHD, he probably does have a minor case; educated rational people are in dispute as to whether it is an asset or a deficiency.  I want to repeat that educated rational people are in dispute as to whether it is an asset or a deficiency.  I want to repeat that educated rational people are in dispute as to whether it is an asset or a deficiency.  Leonardo Da Vinci had an obvious case of ADHD.  He was never forced to take drugs.  Yet he was able to function and succeed in the world, to a reasonable extent.  Tomas Edison can be diagnosed as ADHD, he never was forced to take drugs, he did pretty well, and he discovered a few things and founded GE.  Many successful people in today’s world claim ADHD to be their muse.  I want to repeat that educated rational people are in dispute as to whether it is an asset or a deficiency.  The respondent has intimate hereditary knowledge of ADHD not being an issue but being an asset in everyday life, if nurtured and directed appropriately.  The respondent’s family has a minimum of 3 generations where ADHD has been successfully and fruitfully utilized to enhance life not detract from it.
47. The ADHD is not life threatening.  Left untreated it can have consequences. Left untreated a runny nose can have consequences.  That is too ominous and open ended a statement to be given any weight.  Everyone I know with ADHD does just fine and I have intimate knowledge of several of my family members.  None have been treated with Psychiatric Drug Therapy.  Those that promote Psychiatric Drug Therapy for minor children try to compare it to insulin.  Before insulin, people died of diabetes.  Before Stratera/Ritalin, kids grew up and matured on their own just fine.   
48. There are several treatments for ADHD that do not require Psychiatric Drug Therapy commitments.  There are several means of treating ADHD that are not Psychiatric Drug Therapy.
49. Any credible parent would pursue any and all options before conceding to Psychiatric Drug Therapy for a minor child.  The petitioner is all to ready to take the quick fix that suits her while committing the minor child to a life of drug dependency.
50. The drug companies are in this to the tune of BILLIONS of dollars a year.
51. As regard custody of Patrick, I propose a 7 day rotation with each parent, and a Wednesday night with the parent not having custody that week.  Holidays to be per the schedule worked out with Cynthia Kluzak.  I submitted a proposal at trial inclusive of all items except the rotating Wednesday nights on non custodial weeks.
52. The financial issues of the divorce are reasonably simple
53. The one exception form the settlement I tendered at the trial is the added line item for 12 months of my life stolen by the lies of Petitioner 12 months @ $6,000 / month = $72,000 into Respondents column.
54. See attached financial distribution.
55. As regards child support, both parties make nearly the same amount, both parties are to have equal custody, therefore neither parent should pay child support.
56. When awarded the house, I would allow my wife 6 months after the settlement of all monies to remove her items form the house.
57. All legal fees are the result of the petitioner’s flagrant misuse of the adult abuse protection authority and are to be responsibility of the petitioner.  Her flagrant misuse of the adult abuse protection authority, although supported and condoned by the illegal denials of the respondent’s right to due process by the court are the direct result of her counseled attempts to defraud the respondent of his right to paternity, his right to property and his right to liberty.
58. All tax liabilities are to be born by the parties receiving the funds.  Thus respondent receives the house and $172,000 he pays any tax liabilities on the $172,000.
59. I will be going public with all the above referenced issues when the judgment is published.
60. Furthermore I will be filing charges of abuse of judicial authority in regard to THE COURTS continued denial of the respondent’s RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS.
61. And I will be filing charges of suborning perjury against Mr. Robinson in regard to his coaching of the petitioner and courtroom shenanigans at the abuse trial.

62. All the above references are hereby asserted to be factual and truthful and are thus offered as facts in the case by the respondent.

WHEREFORE, the Respondent prays that this Court will grant it settlement as described above.

                                                                                    ______________________________________

                                                                                    David G. Jeep, Respondent

Dated this 16^th day of December, 2004

	Pro Se

Subscribed and sworn to before me, the undersigned Notary Public, on this _____ day of __________________, 20   .

My Commission Expires:

_______________________________

NOTARY PUBLIC

Sharon G. Jeep and David G. Jeep Settlement Proposal
The House 16325 Centerpointe	$245,000
First Mortgage	($100,000)
Second Mortgage	($58,000)
Contents of the house	$157,300
Wal-Mart Stock	$407,000
Discover	($9,700)
Bank Of America Visa	($4,700)
PayPal Visa	($1,500)
Total Assets	$635,400	$635,400
The House 16325 Centerpointe	$245,000
First Mortgage	($100,000)
Second Mortgage	($58,000)
Equity in the House	$87,000
Dave Gets
Equity in the House	$87,000
Contents of the house	$157,300
Compensation for 1 Year out of my life	$72,000
Les Sharon's Personal Items	($61,870)
Cash Settlement	$100,000
Dave' Share	$354,430	($354,430)
Balance to Sharon	$280,970	$280,970
Respondent’s legal fees by Petitioner		$5,000