Source: http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2013_11_24_archive.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 14:32:08+00:00

Document:
The Judicial sophistry  of "absolute immunity" creates "absolute power" to the ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION  of We the People's unalienable rights under color of law... the AUDACITY of the INSANITY, ignorance and stupidity in support of a "fantastic or delusional" scenario.
Martin Luther King said, "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity" (MLK Jr., Strength to Love, 1963). Justice Thurgood Marshal dissenting in Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 362 (1983) said "To assume that Congress, which had enacted a criminal sanction directed against state judicial officials, intended sub silentio to exempt those same officials from the civil counterpart approaches the incredible."
If you can believe the Black Robed, Royalist, Article III and UNCONSTITUTIONAL judiciary in Connick v. Thompson, 563 U.S. ___ (2011) We the People have sub silentio GONE beyond the "sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity" of Martin Luther King and the "incredible" scenario of Justice Thurgood Marshal's into audacious INSANITY, ignorance and stupidity in support of a "fantastic or delusional" scenario.
We the People in essence, if you can believe the Black Robed Royalist, Article III and unconstitutional Judiciary, "intended sub silentio to" trade the "absolute immunity" of the DEVINE nobility for the "absolute immunity" of the inescapable "malicious, corrupt,"  "sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid"  HUMAN judges, the "malicious or dishonest" prosecutor,  the "knowingly false testimony by police officers," the malicious, corrupt, sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid actions of federal, state, local, and regional legislators and the malicious, corrupt, dishonest, sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid actions of "all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process"  acting under color of law to wit, ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION.
I mean why would We the People even have gone to the effort of a revolutionary war, a constitution, a bill of rights and a civil war to establish reckonable "rights inhering in a state of freedom and belonging to American citizenship" if it was our intent "sub silentio" to exempt those responsible "as to defeat the ends the people desired to accomplish, which they attempted to accomplish, and which they supposed they had accomplished by changes in their fundamental law"???
The source of the Black Robed Royalist Article III Judiciary's Supreme Court precedent to quash the unqualified LIABILITY of the ex industria  constitutionally authorized statute laws in 1868 and 1871, reaches back 406 years to a dissolved, discredited corrupt, for CAUSE, court for a thus corrupted ruling i.e., Floyd & Barker (Star Chamber 1607), to evade their legal, designated under law, responsibility for We the People's inalienable justifiable "property in rights." The Star Chamber had its authority "repealed and absolutely revoked and made void" in 1641 with the Act of Parliament "Abolition of the Star Chamber" July 5, 1641. Now just because the Black Robed Royalist, Article III and unconstitutional Judiciary apparently, to this day, has NEVER GOTTEN the memo, that does not change the FACTS. Floyd & Barker a ruling from the Star Chamber 1607 was "repealed and absolutely revoked and made void," for SPECIFIC cause - abusing said "absolutely immune" power, by the Act of Parliament "Abolition of the Star Chamber" July 5, 1641. Thus Floyd & Barker is void, and it use amounts to fraud, fraus omnia corrumpit. Floyd & Barker's thus fraudulent progeny are made VOID AS WELL!!!!!
Now the FEAR MONGER MISINFORMATIONISTS want you to believe that is because of misguided drug policies. And that IS WRONG. Everybody in the free world has been forced into the same misguided criminalization of DRUGS, at our insistence, to be able to trade with us. It is not Drugs, although in a country such as ours, with judicial sophistry unrestrained that supposedly promotes and holds individual liberty dearer than life itself, victimless crimes should never have been sanctioned by an independent judiciary looking out EXCLUSIVELY to protect and defend our personal liberties.
The REASON we have FIVE times as many people in jail than any other country in the free world is we do not invest in JUSTICE. Justice is not worth the effort in the self-centered view of the Black Robed Royalist, Article III and unconstitutional Judiciary. We have the Jim Crow Era, the Jane Crow Era, the Plea Bargain Era and the Exclusionary Rule Era, where JUSTICE is proclaimed too overgenerous, and nobody is thus answerable to it. A Judge can make up probable cause out of knowingly fraudulent information for an unrelated charge that results in a NOT "facially valid court order" and the signed warrant becomes unquestionable as regards the "property in rights"  of the innocent victim being deprived!!!! Prosecutors can hide behind the sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid denial of exculpable evidence/due process. The police can give "knowingly false testimony " and withhold evidence. There is nothing in the plea bargain era that the innocent victim can do to redress the JUSTIFIABLE grievance.
Just imagine negotiating for your LIFE in a plea bargain where the ethically unencumbered adversary can withhold exculpable evidence and assert "knowingly false testimony by police officers." The lone innocent accused victim has no hope for defense against "knowingly false testimony by police officers" and the denial of exculpable evidence they have no knowledge of. If you are luckily, or unluckily, in a capital murder trial where the death penalty has been an issue after 18 years, an investigator might just happen to find the evidence that clears your name, as in Connick v Thompson, but do not expect an apology or any redress of grievances. There is no "property in rights" that our government of the People, by the People, for the People is bound to respect. We the People have asserted "property in rights" from the beginning with 1st and 7th Amendment Justice, but our Black Robed Royalist, Article III Judiciary has with the sophistry unrestrained unconstitutionally DENIED "We the People" any "property in rights" via their judge made law of "absolute immunity"
The Judicial sophistry  of "absolute immunity" creates "absolute power" to the ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION of We the People's unalienable rights under color of law.
As examples of the Judicial sophistry, that has corrupted We the People's unalienable rights under color of law, I submit, Randall v. Brigham, 74 U.S. 7 (1868) the origin of judicial criminal sophisticated "absolute immunity," Bradley v. Fisher, 13 Wall. 335 (1872) origin of sophisticated Judicial civil "absolute immunity," Blyew v. United States, 80 U.S. 581 (1871) sophisticated "absolute immunity" for racially motivate mass murder, United States v. Reese, 92 U.S. 214 (1875) sophisticated deprivation of the 15th Amendment's Voting Rights protection… the subterfuge of poll taxes, literacy tests, and grandfather clauses, United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875) sophisticated "absolute immunity" for racially motivated massacre (Colfax Riot/pogrom), United States v. Harris, 106 U.S. 629 (1883) sophisticated "absolute immunity" for the states allowance of kidnapping, assault and murder without regard to the 14th Amendments security, Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3 (1883) creating sophisticated racial segregation and the ongoing Jim Crow discrimination over the "necessary and proper" "Act to protect all citizens in their civil and legal rights." 18 Stat. 335, enacted March 1, 1875, Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896) separate and UNEQUAL, clarifying sophisticated segregation over the necessary and proper "Act to protect all citizens in their civil and legal rights." 18 Stat. 335, enacted March 1, 1875, Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967) reaffirmed Judicial sophisticated "absolute immunity," Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 409 (1976) prosecutorial sophisticated "absolute immunity," Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978) sophisticated "absolute immunity" for forced sterilization, and Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) sophisticated "absolute immunity" for "knowingly false testimony by police officers," and "all persons that were integral in the Judicial Process." If that is not ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION of We the People's intent to establish justice, I can not imagine what is.
The FEAR MONGERS want us ARMED and READY, via District of Columbia v. Heller, for the inevitable conflict they are FOMENTING with the promulgation of FEARFUL MISINFORMATION being funded by Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. They want to destabilize the economy by crippling the American Economy with a crash of the currency based on a refusal to honor the Fourteenth Amendment's "The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, "The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), commonly called the Affordable Care Act (ACA) or "Obamacare", is a United States federal statute LAW," shall not be questioned.
You want to fall for the sophistry that the Fourteenth Amendment's assertions were put there to reassure veterans of the Civil War. WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You and OTHERS want to believe that the Civil War Era citizen was economically ignorant? That is so FAR WRONG it is almost laughable. Those that had lived through the Civil War had REAL LIFE experience with the economic failure of a Government to support its legal tender. The "Greyback" (Confederate States of America dollar) had JUST COLLAPSED!!!! The terms "greenback" and "greyback" refers to legal tender, printed in green/grey on one side and issued by the United States/Confederate States respectively during the American Civil War which was backed not by the conventional gold or silver standard but by the "validity"of the issuing government.
As the war began to tilt against the Confederates, confidence in the "greyback" diminished, and inflation followed. By the end of 1864, the "greyback" was practically worthless."
My QUESTION is how did the UNQUALIFIED governmental liability for an individuals RIGHTS i.e., the "property in rights" as asserted by James Madison (1792) and the Revolutionary War, Civil War, Constitution, World War I, World War II and the "statute's (§1983) raisons d'etre," get reduced??? Do we have to invest more lives to ESTABLISH an INDIVIDUAL's PROPERTY in RIGHTS???
What good are rights if the "property in rights," as confirmed by James Madison (1792), is not protected UNQUALIFIED by any government authority under color of law??
Why have a constitution, much less statute law; if it can be disregarded as disposable property in the hands of those who are commissioned to provide UNQUALIFIED protection of the "property in rights" under color of law???
"Immunity is given to crime, and the records of the public tribunals are searched in vain for any evidence of effective redress." "The courts are in many instances under the control of those who are wholly inimical to the impartial administration of law and equity." I say it NOW, Monday, November 25, 2013!!! Justice William O. Douglas said it in 1961 and 1967.  Mr. Lowe of Kansas and Mr. Rainey of South Carolina respectively said respectively said it originally in 1871 at the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1871 (now codified in Federal Statute laws as Civil 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 1985).
 "And if you think that is a national problem, consider that the United States is by far the World's greatest power; it is not accountable to its own people for its abuses of power, and that abuse of power flows freely into international circles. Given that reality, there is not a nation in the world that should not fear us in the same way that a reasonable person fears a child with a gun." 31 U. WEST L.A. L. REV. ( Summer 2000 ) JOHN E. WOLFGRAM e.g., George W. Bush's false representations of Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, "The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder" by Famed prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi - Underlining and parenthetical text added for emphasis.
 18 USC §241-§242 Criminal Deprivation of rights under color of law and 42 USC §1983-§1985 Civil action for deprivation of rights.
 The "raison d'être" for our Revolution, Constitution, Bill of Rights, Civil War and the subsequent constitutionally authorized statute laws, now codified into the U.S. Code as 18 USC §241-§242 Criminal Deprivation of rights under color of law and 42 USC §1983-§1985 Civil action for deprivation of rights.
 The exclusionary rule itself is sometimes alleged to be overgenerous, but this assumption ASSUMES the justice system can do no wrong. Justice demands that both crimes be prosecuted, the instant crime and the crime against rights.
 Justice without regard to equity impoverishes the victim at the expense of the evil they have suffered. I have been forced into poverty, homelessness for 6 years!!!! The 1st Amendment secures the constitutional right to a lawfully un-abridge-able justifiable redress of grievance from the government: "Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." The 7th Amendment secures the right to settle all suits: "In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law" assures justice as regards equity.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 1983
 §241
 §1983
 §241
 §1983