A Petition for Rehearing - Petition for Writ of Certiorari 14-5551 David Jeep v. Government of United States EMPHASIS “a Republican Form of Government,” [7] “cruel and unusual punishments”[8] and “involuntary servitude”[9] that “a four-year-old[10]” could understand

DELIVERED -OCTOBER 10, 2014 , 10:39 AM - WASHINGTON, DC 20543

First-Class Mail® Certified Mail™ Label Number: 7014-1820-0001-8019-5041

_  _______________________________________________________________

No.   14-5551                              

Appeal Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals: 14-1470

Eastern Missouri U.S. District Court Case No. 4:13-cv-02490-RWS

_  _______________________________________________________________

PETITIONER FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI

David G. Jeep and heir Petitioners

v.

RESPONDENT(S) ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI

The Government of the United States of America, et al, Defendants/Respondents

_  _______________________________________________________________

A Petition for Rehearing – Petition for Writ of Certiorari 14-5551[1]

_______________________________________________________________  _

For your re-consideration I submit three points that were just recently apparent, to the pro se indigent petitioner, and not made an issue in the original petition:

1.)    "Republican Form of Government,"[2]

      a.)  ""The germ of destruction of our nation is in the power of the judiciary,

             an irresponsible (i.e., unrepresentative) body - working like gravity by

             night and day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing

            it's noiseless step like a thief over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall

            render powerless the checks of one branch over the other and will

            become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we

            separated." --Thomas Jefferson"[3]

     b.)The FIAT un-representative governing empowered by across the board

           "absolute immunity" for the Article III Judiciary negates the constitutional

            guarantee of "a Republican Form of Government" (Constitution for the

            United States of America, Article IV , Section 4, § 1) as secured by the

            representation of the 7^th Amendment's civil jury of one's peers.

2.)    "cruel and unusual punishments"[4]

     a.)  Beyond the "complete lack of jurisdiction" STRESSED in the original

           order at the center of this issue, the Order created an infliction of a "cruel

           and unusual punishments" for an ex parte order of protection[5] i.e., a

           misdemeanor traffic violation as probable cause for an ex parte order of

           protection is "cruel and unusual" to say the least.

3.)    "involuntary servitude"[6]

     a.)  In that petition was without reason or warrant, petitioner was FORCED

           into "involuntary servitude" to sustain his parental rights to see his son.

_____--___________________________________________________________

Respectfully submitted, Monday , October 06, 2014

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.  

                                                        

David G. Jeep

GENERAL DELIVERY

Saint Louis, MO  63155-9999

E-Mail David.G.Jeep@GMail.com or DGJeep01@yahoo.com (preferred)

(314) 514-5228

First-Class Mail®       Certified Mail™ Label Number: 7014-1820-0001-8019-5041

Scott S. Harris, Clerk of the Court

Supreme Court of the United States

One First Street N.E.

Washington, DC 20543-0001

Re: A Petition for Rehearing - Petition for Writ of Certiorari 14-5551 David Jeep v. Government of United States EMPHASIS "a Republican Form of Government," [7] "cruel and unusual punishments"[8] and "involuntary servitude"[9] that "a four-year-old[10]" could understand

Dear Mr. Harris,

I stress, as always, "Time is of the essence."  I am impoverished and have been homeless for 6.92 years in this 11.40 year effort.[11] 

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

"The germ of destruction of our nation is in the power of the judiciary, an irresponsible body - working like gravity by night and day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing it's noiseless step like a thief over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall render powerless the checks of one branch over the other and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated." --Thomas Jefferson [12]

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

Thank you in advance.

"Time is of the essence"

 David G. Jeep

enclosure

a.     "A Petition for Rehearing - Petition for Writ of Certiorari 14-1470 David Jeep v. Government of United States" dated Tuesday, Monday , October 06, 2014

cc:  Donald B. Verrilli Jr. Solicitor General

       My Blog - Monday , October 06, 2014

First-Class Mail® 

Donald B. Verrilli Jr. Solicitor General

United States Department of Justice

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, DC 20530-0001

(202) 514-2217

SupremeCtBriefs@USDOJ.gov

Re:      "A Petition for Rehearing - Petition for Writ of Certiorari 14-1470 David Jeep v. Govern-ment of United States"

Dear Mr. Verrilli,

I stress, as always, "Time is of the essence."  I am impoverished and have been homeless for 6.92 years in this 11.40 year effort.[13]

Please accept the transmission of the above referenced petition.

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

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing and enclosed is true and correct.  

Thank you in advance.

"Time is of the essence"

David G. Jeep

enclosure

a.     "A Petition for Rehearing - Petition for Writ of Certiorari 14-1470 David Jeep v. Government of United States" dated Monday , October 06, 2014

cc:  My Blog - Monday , October 06, 2014

---

[1] Docket for 07-11115, Docket for 11-8211, Docket for 13-5193 and Docket for 13-7030

[2] Constitution for the United States of America, Article IV , Section 4, § 1

[3] As quoted into the Congressional Record Senate Vol. 152, Pt. 1 page 80-81, Mr. Santorum and Bergh, 15:331. 1821

[4] The Bill of Rights, Passed by Congress March 4, 1789, Ratified December 15, 1791, specifically : AMENDMENT VIII

[5] Missouri Revised Statutes Chapter 455 Abuse--Adults and Children--Shelters and Protective Orders  Section 455.050  August 28, 2013

[6] AMENDMENT XIII Passed by Congress January 31, 1865. Ratified December 6, 1865.

[7] Constitution for the United States of America, Article IV , Section 4, § 1

[8] The Bill of Rights, ratified December 15, 1791, specifically : AMENDMENT VIII

[9] AMENDMENT XIII  Passed by Congress January 31, 1865. Ratified December 6, 1865.

[10] Attorney Joe Miller (Denzel Washington REPEATED ASSERTION in "Philadelphia"): Now, explain it to me like I'm a four-year-old.

[11] As of Monday October 06 2014 01:25 PM

[12] As quoted into the Congressional Record Senate Vol. 152, Pt. 1 page 80-81, Mr. Santorum and Bergh, 15:331. 1821.

[13] As of Monday October 06 2014 01:25 PM

--

Thanks in advance,

To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process

"Agere sequitur esse"

"Time is  of the essence"

David G. Jeep
http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/
My E-mail addresses are David.G.Jeep@GMail.com orDGJeep01@yahoo.com

(314) 514-5228

David G. Jeep

GENERAL DELIVERY

Saint Louis , MO 63155-9999

Denial of Petition 14-5551

Petition 14-5551 Denial - Monday, October 6, 2014

You are both suppose to be somewhat versed in constitutional law. That being said neither of you seem to have the faintest idea of a constitution’s raison d'être. Petition for Writ of Certiorari 14-5551[1]

President Barack Hussein Obama

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, DC 20500-0001

Chief Justice John G. Roberts

Supreme Court of the United States

One First Street N.E.    

Washington, DC 20543-0001

Re: Petition for Writ of Certiorari 14-5551[1]

Dear Gentlemen,

You are both suppose to be somewhat versed in constitutional law.  That being said neither of you seem to have the faintest idea of a constitution's raison d'être.

The Constitution for the United States of America was irrefutably written to give We the People recourse, a cause of action, against the government whenever and wherever an individual's reckonable "rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws" were deprived by the government.  This is clearly demonstrated by Chief Justice John Marshal quoting Blackstone in Marbury v Madison, "it is a general and indisputable rule[2] that where there is a legal right, there is also a legal remedy by suit or action at law whenever that right is invaded."[3]

 Yet, neither of you will enforce the

Constitution's raison d'être.

 ABOVE AND BEYOND THAT, Mr. President you will not enforce[4] the constitutionally authorized ex industria criminal law, We the People lawfully enacted post civil war, the Civil rights Act of 1866.[5]  Mr. Chief Justice you will not enforce[6] the constitutionally authorized ex industria civil law, We the People lawfully enacted post civil war, the Civil rights Act of 1871.[7]  

You both support and assert the American coveted status of victimhood.  The American coveted status of victimhood was spawned by the corrupt, self-serving Unconstitutional Article III Judiciary.  As we all know, the judiciary corruptly asserts they would be unable to function, OVERWHELMED by "continual calumnious"[8] or "vexatious"[9] actions, if they were not afforded absolute immunity.  That assertion is based on the premise that "equal protection" of Due Process of law is not possible.  Thus the Constitution for the United States of America is without validity or enforceability.  This absolute immunity empowers absolute power to the ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION[10] of individual reckonable inalienable rights.

That is the MODERN American definition of victimhood.  Without extraordinary measure for XYZ they cannot SURVIVE.  XYZ needs protection above and beyond that of normal persons or they will never survive.

This creates a multi-tier system of justice which is diametrically incompatible with the 14^th Amendment's REQUIREMENT of "equal protection of the laws."  Nonetheless it is unconstitutionally sustained and enforced by our constitutional guardians, the Article III Judiciary, for their and their chosen few self-serving benefit to the detriment of the overwhelming majority of We the People.

One need only look at the Jane Crow sexual and Post Jim Crow racial discrimination e.g.:

With the coveted status of victimhood in the Jane Crow era, "It doesn't take a cynic to point out that when a woman (with the coveted status of victimhood) is getting a divorce, what she may truly fear is not violence, but losing the house or kids. Under an ex parte order of protection, if she's willing to fib to the judge and say she is "in fear" of her children's father, she will get custody and money and probably the house."[11]

and

With the coveted status of victimhood in the Post Jim Crow era, we have the criminal profiteering, looting and rioting in Ferguson Missouri over a blatantly false assertion of a civil rights violation, as the result of Michael Brown's strong armed robbery, jaywalking and assault on a police officer with SHOTS FIRED.[12]

I feel it appropriate to quote from Lord Coke, "invigilandum est semper, multae insidiae sunt bonis" (Ed.: one must always be on one's guard, for in good things there are many snares) there is a difference from being on one's guard and turning the blind eye of "absolute immunity."  We the People hoped to "establish justice" with our constitution, not blindly sustain and promulgate "malice and corruption" of "absolute immunity's" ABSOLUTE POWER.[13] 

On another note - How can a Petition be "DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 29, 2014," that is not on the schedule?  There is NO CONFERENCE SCHEDULED for September 29, 2014.

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

Thank you in advance.

"Time is of the essence"

  

David G. Jeep

cc:  My Blog - Friday, September 05, 2014, 3:36:32 PM

---

[1] See also United States Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals Case #07-2614, 08-1823, 10-1947, 11-2425, 12-2435, 13-2200 and 14-1470…Docketed and denied Petitions for Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115, 11-8211, 13-5193 & 13-7030

[2] Absolute Immunity DEFEATS that without due process of law!!!!!!!!!!

[3] Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 163 (1803)

[4] You try negotiating for your life, liberty, property or your children in the "Jane Crow" / "Plea Bargain" / "Post Jim Crow era" overseen by an "absolutely immune" sincerely ignorant, conscientiously stupid,  "malicious or corrupt judge" (Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967)) with an "absolutely immune" "malicious or dishonest" prosecutor (Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 409 (1976)), the "absolutely immune" "knowingly false testimony by police officers," (Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983)) or malicious, corrupt, dishonest, sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid actions of "all persons (including spouses) -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process" (Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983)).  This creates ABSOLUTE POWER to the ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION of inalienable rights!!!!

We the People of the United States of America have NO enforceable Civil Rights!!!!!

[5] U.S. Code as 18 USC §241 - §242[5] Criminal Deprivation of rights under color of law

[6] To hear the Supreme Court tell us, via their unrestricted absolutely immune power, We the People, all evidence to the contrary, traded the "King can do no WRONG" for the ABSOLUTELY IMMUNE actions of the "malicious or corrupt" judges(Bradley v. Fisher, supra, 80 U. S. 335, 80 U. S. 349, note, at 80 U. S. 350, Pierson v. Ray, 386 U. S. 57 (1967) Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978)),[6] the "malicious or dishonest" prosecutor Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976), [6] the "knowingly false testimony by police officers" (Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983)),[6] corrupt, malicious, dishonest, sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid[6] actions[6] of federal, state, local, and regional legislators (Bogan v. Scott-Harris - 523 U.S. 44 (1997) Tenney v. Brandhove, 341 U. S. 367, 372, 372-376; Amy v. Supervisors, 11 Wall. 136, 138)[6] and the malicious, corrupt, dishonest, sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid[6] actions of "all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who (spouses) were integral parts of the judicial process" (Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983)) [6] acting under color of law to render ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION[6] of inalienable rights under color of law.

[7] 42 USC §1983 - §1985[7] Civil action for deprivation of rights

[8] Floyd and Barker (1607) Easter Term, 5 James I In the Court of Star Chamber. "For they are only to make an account to God and the King, and not to answer to any suggestion in the Star Chamber; for this would tend to the scandall and subversion of all Justice. And those who are the most sincere, would not be free from continual Calumniations, for which reason the Orator said well, invigilandum est semper, multae insidiae sunt bonis.( Ed.: one must always be on one's guard, for in good things there are many snares.)"

[9] Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 354 (1871) "The exemption of judges of the superior courts of record from liability to civil suit for their judicial acts existing when there is jurisdiction of the subject matter, though irregularity and error attend the exercise of the jurisdiction, the exemption cannot be affected by any consideration of the motives with which the acts are done. The allegation of malicious or corrupt motives could always be made, and if the motives could be inquired into judges would be subjected to the same vexatious litigation upon such allegations, whether the motives had or had not any real existence. Against the consequences of their erroneous or irregular action, from whatever motives proceeding, the law has provided for private parties numerous remedies, and to those remedies they must, in such cases, resort. But for malice or corruption in their action whilst exercising their judicial functions within the general scope of their jurisdiction, the judges of these courts can only be reached by public prosecution in the form of impeachment, or in such other form as may be specially prescribed.

[10] "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority, still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it." Lord Acton in a letter he wrote to scholar and ecclesiastic Mandell Creighton, dated April 1887.

[11]  "The Booming Domestic Violence Industry" - Massachusetts News, 08/02/99, By John Maguire, Hitting below the belt Monday, 10/25/99 12:00 ET, By Cathy Young, Salon - Divorced men claim discrimination by state courts, 09/07/99, By Erica Noonan, Associated Press, Dads to Sue for Discrimination, 08/24/99, By Amy Sinatra, ABCNEWS.com, The Federal Scheme to Destroy Father-Child Relationships, by Jake Morphonios, 02/13/08.

[12] See my blog for more specific information on Michael Brown/Ferguson Missouri

http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2014/08/michael-brown-and-ferguson-missouris.html  http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/search/label/Ferguson

  [13] "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" Lord Acton 1887.

--

Thanks in advance,

To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process

"Agere sequitur esse"

"Time is  of the essence"

David G. Jeep
http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/
My E-mail addresses are David.G.Jeep@GMail.com orDGJeep01@yahoo.com

(314) 514-5228

David G. Jeep

GENERAL DELIVERY

Saint Louis , MO 63155-9999

14-5551 Set for Conference 09-29-14

I need your HELP to bringing the CORRUPTION to LIGHT!!!  

Petition for Writ of Certiorari 14-5551.

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

2014 08-25-14 Waiver of right to file a response filed Docket for 14-5551

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari 14-5551 Jeep v. Government of the U.S. of A. The Michael Brown[1] issue AND the coveted status of American victimhood

Donald B. Verrilli Jr. Solicitor General

United States Department of Justice

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, DC 20530-0001

(202) 514-2217

SupremeCtBriefs@USDOJ.gov

Re: Petition for a Writ of Certiorari 14-5551 Jeep v. Government of the U.S. of A.

       The Michael Brown[1] issue AND the coveted status of American victimhood

Dear Mr. Verrilli,

Hopefully you are not as detached from the real world as your consistent sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid[2] actions[3] portend.

Anyone that says Michael Brown raised his arms in surrender is LYING.

I do not care what sex, what age, or what color they are, white, black, pink, blue, purple or GREEN.  When a 6'4" 292 lb. person, whom you have just struggled with to retain control of your gun, is now CHARGING you!!!  You fire 4 non-lethal shots HUMANELY into his/her right arm to dissuade them and they refuse to stop.  You are then forced to shoot for the head. 

What are you thinking, the police PERSON just lies down and lets Brown take his gun this time??? 

Now without actually being there we cannot envision the tense time frame, but this all occurred in maybe 2-3 minutes maximum… say 180 VERY TENSE seconds after the struggle for the gun WITH A SHOT FIRED in the vehicle… the time it took Piaget Crenshaw to ill-advisedly look for and find her I-Pad/camera and move from the bedroom to the balcony to miss ACTUALLY seeing it or recording it. 

Now you say there are conflicting stories of the events, anyone that says he raised his arms in surrender is LYING.  There is NO WAY he could have done that with one bullet, much less four bullets, in the FRONT SIDE of his right arm.  And there is no way the officer could have shot four bullets into the FRONT SIDE of his arm while his arms were raised, exposing the backside of his arms.  This is all confirmed by Mrs. Brown’s own forensics, the Baden autopsy.[4]

Given that, when you consider the FACT, Ferguson/North St. Louis has one of the highest murder rates in the country, this OVERBLOWN issue is not about the UN-justified death of another young black man.  Like most of urban America, young black men are dyeing unjustified at their own hands, black on black violence, on an all too often REGULAR BASIS in Ferguson/North St. Louis.

The Michael Brown issue is about the coveted status of American victimhood.  In the United State of America we treat woman and minorities the high-ranking, coveted status of American Victimhood.

The Michael Brown issue was not the result years of white oppression.  Ferguson Missouri’s African American MAJORITY had FREELY elected a white mayor.  Regionally the city of St. Louis, with a majority of African American voters, has elected a WHITE Mayor 4 times in row starting 2001; in the more affluent St. Louis County a White Majority has and has elected a BLACK County Executive (Mayor) twice in the last 10 years.  There is not and never has, for the last 50 years, been any RACIAL TENSION!!! 

THIS IS ALL BEING FABRICATED BY A FEW CRIMINALLY IMPLICATED INSTIGATORS TO HIDE BEHIND MICHAEL BROWN’S DEATH AND ASSERTED VICTIMHOOD TO COVER UP THEIR CRIMINAL RIOTOUS ATROCITIES!!!!

As my FRIENDS know, I am ADAMANTLY anti-GUN and have spent 10 years, 7 of those years homeless and endured 411 days in jail for my personal CIVIL RIGHTS struggle!!!!!!!!!!!!  Trying to EXPOSE the coveted status of American Victimhood, in the “Jane Crow” era, that panders to women and minorities at the expense of EVERYONE-ELSE’S inalienable individual[5] constitutional RIGHTS!!!!

As a side note, PLEASE do not make the Michael Brown issue into a remake of “Reefer Madness.”  Marijuana is not to BLAME!!!!

GET A GRIP!!!!!!!!!!!!!

CHECK THE FACTS!!!!!!

READ MY BLOG!!!! http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2014/08/michael-brown-and-ferguson-missouris.html

In this 11.17 year effort, 411 days[6] incarcerated, 6.70 years homeless, and 5 trips[7] to the Supreme Court of the United States I have left no proverbial or real life “stone unturned.”  Leave this petition undefended and the CORRUPTION leaves only one means to establish Justice in a country supposedly based on reasonable “due process of law.”

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

Thank you in advance.

“Time is of the essence” 

David G. Jeep

enclosure

a.     Letter to Solicitor General that did not listPetition for Writ of Certiorari #14-5551 see online BLOG post for complete copy

cc:  My Blog - Wednesday, August 27, 2014, 4:15:50 PM

---

[1] “Shooting Accounts Differ as Holder Schedules Visit to Ferguson”  NYTimes By FRANCES ROBLES and MICHAEL S. SCHMIDTAUG. 19, 2014 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/20/us/shooting-accounts-differ-as-holder-schedules-visit.html

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

[3] The 4 PREVIOUSLY repeated denials of petitions (07-11115, 11-8211, 13-5193 & 13-7030 and NOW 14-5551) comes FIRST TO MIND but also, the UNPROSECUTED and UNCONSTITUTIONALLY challenged recent Government Shut Down comes to mind, but the Black Robed Royalist Article III Supreme Court had already handed our legislators absolute immunity for their legislative actions, Bogan v. Scott-Harris - 523 U.S. 44 (1997).  --- See also David Gerard Jeep Appellant v. The Tea Party/GOP/Republicans, et al. Appellees U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis Case #: 13CV2089-DDN, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit No: 14-1344

[4]“ Mr. Brown, 18, was also shot four times in the right arm, he said, adding that all the bullets were fired into his front.”  “Mrs. Brown’s Autopsy Shows Michael Brown Was Struck at Least 6 Times” NYTimes By FRANCES ROBLES and JULIE BOSMAN AUG. 17, 2014 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/18/us/michael-brown-autopsy-shows-he-was-shot-at-least-6-times.html?_r=0

[5] "The essence of the constitutional right to equal protection of the law is that it is a personal one, and does not depend upon the number of persons affected, and any individual who is denied by a common carrier, under authority of the state, a facility or convenience which is furnished to another under substantially the same circumstances may properly complain that his constitutional privilege has been invaded." McCabe v. Atchison, T. & S.F. Ry. Co., 235 U.S. 151 (1914)

[6] U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis Case #4:09-cr-00659-CDP, Habeas Cases 4:09-CV-831 CAS, 4:09-MJ-1052 TIA, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit 09-2848  David Jeep  vs.  United States

[7] Docketed and denied Petitions for Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115, 11-8211, 13-5193 & 13-7030 and NOW 14-5551