UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT - Scanned Retina … · Web view06/11/2014 · UNITED STATES...

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA333 Constitution Ave N.W.

Washington, District of Columbia 20001

United States of America CASE # 1:13 cr 00253

rodney-dale; [class] Private Attorney General432 North Lincoln St.High Shoals, North CarolinaAmerica National Flesh and Blood Real Party of Interest By Congressional Act Private Attorney General, Constitutional Bounty Hunter Plaintiff

Vs. Title 28, Ch. 5, District Court, § 88 District of Columbia Constitutional Article III Court AND Judge Chief Judge Richard W. Roberts

UNITED STATES OF AMERICANO KNOWN ADDRESSENTITY UNDISCLOSED

Fictitious Defendant

Appropriate Federal AgencyOR Federal Corporate Agency of same Title/name Barack Obama (proper party, administrator federal agencyor federal corporate agency)The White House1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NWWashington, DC 20500-0004

PETER LALLAS (proper party, agent federal agencyor federal corporate agency)U.S. Department of Justice950 Pennsylvania Avenues, NWWashington, DC 20530-0001

of 33

ANDREW D. FINKELMAN (proper party, agent federal agencyor federal corporate agency)U.S. Department of Justice950 Pennsylvania Avenues, NWWashington, DC 20530-0001

LENEEKA C. MANNING (proper party, agent federal agencyor federal corporate agency)United States Capitol Police Office119 D Street, NEWashington, DC 20510

Vincent Condol Gray (proper party, agent federal agencyor federal corporate agency)1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 316,Washington, DC 20004

Wrongdoers, Foreign Defendants

PRETRIAL STATEMENT AS ORDERED BY JUDGE KESSLER ON MAY 15, 2014

of 33

Now Comes a living man with a soul, rodney-dale; [class] (Hereinafter meaning

“a living flesh and blood man with a soul, a being/natural person”), and states and

deposes the following in his official capacity as a Private Attorney General and as a

Constitutional Bounty Hunter pursuant to Congressional mandate(s) of the United States

Congress, and respectfully prays and asks to move this Court RE: PRETRIAL

STATEMENT.

PART 1

Narrative Statement Of The Case

I, a man called rodney-dale; [class], entered into Washington DC on May 30,

2013 to file more documentation before the House Judiciary Committee and the Senate

Judiciary Committee on the legislative position granted to me by Congress as a Bounty

Hunter under the Bounty Hunter Responsibility Act of 1999 and 2005, and under the

14th Amendment, section 4 to the Constitution and my position as Private Attorney

General under the Statutes at Large supported by Title 42 USC, sections 1988 and

1983.

The purpose for the above documents being filed before the House Judiciary

Committee in the Senate Judiciary Committee was to allow me to walk into a Federal or

State Court and allow me to represent any living man or woman in the United States in a

defense of their civil rights and to furnish them a means of vindication by me being a

Private Attorney General.

of 33

These congressional statutes allow the private citizen to act as a Private Attorney

General and bring a claim against those who hold public office whether it be a judge, a

prosecutor, or law enforcement, etc. for violations of that position of honor and who fail

to follow the rules and guidelines laid out by the United States Congress for them to hold

that job description.

This comes under a federal Tort Claim action under Title 28 USC, sec. 2672

administrative adjustment claim, sec. 2674 liability of United States, and 28 USC, sec.

2401 time for commencing action against United States.

These are the rights of the people to bring an action against a public office or

officer that violates Title 5 USC, sec. 7311 and Title 18 USC, sec. 1918, etc. As this court

can see I quoted federal statutes that the Prosecution is claiming that makes me such a

"Threat" to the court system because I am using federal statutes for misconduct and abuse

of a public office that was created by Congressional legislative authority created by

Congress as found in the Statutes at Large and reflected, but not always accurately, in the

USC Titles.

I was on my way to Pennsylvania to enter my appearance into a Federal Court

case and to bring misconduct charges and abuse charges against those who hold public

office IF, and the key word here is" IF," they violated one of the people's rights secured

by the Constitution of the United States of America in the courtroom and to bring claim

against them for misconduct and abuse, however I was stopped and detained by the

Capitol Hill Police Department and never made it to Pennsylvania !

of 33

After first stopping at the House Judiciary Committee then upon leaving the

Senate Judiciary Committee going back to my Jeep I was detained by the Capitol Hill

Police department and questioned about being parked in a restricted area. At which point

I was handcuffed, searched and my Jeep was searched in the parking lot where I was

parked and then I was taken to the police department and interrogated. According to the

police report I was stopped at 1:21 PM, at 4:18PM I was finally read my Miranda

Warning and at 5:00 PM I was officially arrested and incarcerated.

I will remind this court of two very important things: First, I possessed a valid

carry conceal permit from the State of North Carolina. See NC general statutes under

Article 54B Concealed Handgun Permit § 14-415.24. Second: Congress create the Law

that created both the court system and my position as a 14th Amendment Constitutional

Bounty Hunter and Private Attorney General.

These police officers were told that I had a carry permit and they made a copy of

it for the Police Department. This permit was to have been reciprocal according to

North Carolina general statutes. (A valid concealed handgun permit or license issued

by another state is valid in North Carolina.) This also falls under the Constitution for the

United States, Article 4, sections 1 and 2 and the 14th Amendment, section 1.

I was placed in jail over that weekend to await a hearing before a DC Superior

Court Judge on Monday, June 3, 2013 and have now been coming back and forth from

North Carolina to DC for different court hearings and have been forced to wear a GPS

tracking device.

of 33

PART 2

DEFENSE STIPULATIONS

STIPULATIONS SOUGHT

A “trial by jury” as opposed to a “jury trial” or a “judge trial,' in other words the Trial

should comply with the words of:

The Language of Magna Carta

The language of the Great Charter establishes the same point that is established by

its history, viz., that it is the right and duty of the jury to judge of the justice of

the laws.

“Nullus liber homo capiatur, vel imprisonetur, aut disseisetur de libero tenemento,

vel libertatibus, vel liberis consuetudinibus suis, aututlagetur, autexuletur, aut

aliquo modo destruatur, nec super eumibimus, nec super eummittemus, nisi per

legale judicium parium suorum, vel per legem terrae.”

The most common translation of these words, at the present day, is as follows:

“No freeman shall he arrested, or imprisoned, or deprived of his freehold, or his

liberties, or free customs, or outlawed, or exiled, or in any manner destroyed, nor

will we (the king) pass upon him, nor condemn him, unless by the judgment of

his peers, or the law of the land.” (Emphasis added.) Nowhere is the interdiction

of a judge mentioned.

ALSO, the Prosecution cannot use the 2001 Ohio violation and conviction be-

cause a “prior felony conviction” does not arise because the Defendant Did Not serve a

qualifying “one year and one day,” but rather served only 60 days for the violation ! See

also Part 7... of 33

PART 3

PROPOSED VOIR DIRE QUESTIONS

Do you live or work in Washington, DC ?

Do you work for either the federal government or the District of Columbia in any capacity ?

Does any member of your family work for either the federal government or the District of Columbia or any other quasi-“government” agency in any capacity ?

Do you or any member of your family have a Social Security Card or any other Federal License or obligatory encumbrance (like a military, postal or railroad retirement, etc.) ?

Do you or have you sworn an oath to the Constitution for the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA as a foreigner.

Do you or family members come under the IOIA International Organizations Immunities Act.

Etc...to be added and properly submitted before Trial.

PART 4

PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Jury instructions should NOT be influenced by unauthorized statements of the Judge as to

the Jury's “duty” in considering evidence or any other influencing statements that favor

the Plaintiff in deciding the case !

The Language of Magna Carta

“The language of the Great Charter establishes the same point that is established

by its history, viz., that it is the right and duty of the jury to judge of the justice

of the laws.”

of 33

PART 5

DEFENDANT'S PROPOSED VERDICT FORM

The Defendant reserves the right to accept, reject, modify or completely re-phrase

the Verdict Form questions for the final version of that form which is used by the Jury.

Here are some sample questions that the Defendant approves:

We the jury find the following answers to the following questions

1. Did the Capitol Hill Police Department follow proper procedures as defined in the

Codes, Statutes and the Constitution for the United States by having a proper written

complaint with an oath or affirmation sworn in order to obtain a Warrant for search and

seizure of property and detainment of the Defendant ?

YES _____ NO _____

2. Did the Prosecution “produce” or “make appear” an actual “Plaintiff” in the Court and

before the Jury that was a “real and “physically or mentally injured” party, a living man

or woman of flesh and blood and did he or she (the “Plaintiff”), on May 30, 2013, sustain

“physical or mental” injuries, damages and/or harm caused to him or her by the

Defendant ?

YES _____ NO _____

3. Did the “Plaintiff” (the government), on May 30, 2013, sustain “physical or mental”

injuries, damages and/or harm caused to him or her by the Defendant ?

YES _____ NO _____

of 33

4. Was the Plaintiff (the government) proved to be a “fictitious entity” created by itself

(the government) and shown as a way to bring false charges against the Defendant (and

“others similarly situated,” the People).

YES _____ NO _____

5. Did the Prosecution misrepresent the laws presented to the Jury by misleading the Jury

as to the true definitions of the word “firearm” as defined in the Statutes at Large and the

word “person” as defined in the Statutes at Large as applying ONLY to the

“manufacturers” and “dealers” and not to the Defendant ?

YES _____ NO _____

6. Did the Plaintiff (the government) violate its own Rules and Procedures and

regulations under the federal Statutes and under the Constitution of protecting the

Defendant's rights before this court and is the Plaintiff guilty of sedition, insurrection, and

treason in violation of the public peace and crimes against humanity ?

YES _____ NO _____

7. Is the Defendant NOT GUILTY of the charges ?

YES _____ NO _____

Signed: ______________________

Jury Foreperson

of 33

PART 6

LIST OF PROPOSED WITNESSES EITHER EXPERT OR OPINION

Below is a list of witnesses to be subpoenaed for the Defense.

WITNESS SUBPOENA LIST FOR DEFENSE

ATTORNEY PETER LALLAS, Former Prosecutor for this case, ATTORNEY FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 555 4TH STREET, N.W., ROOM 4110, WASHINGTON, DC 20530 Hostile and liability witness

ATTORNEY ANDREW FINKELMAN, For the Prosecution, ATTORNEY FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 555 4TH STREET, N.W., ROOM 4207, WASHINGTON, DC 20530 Hostile and liability witness

LAWYER A.J. KRAMER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, For the Defense, FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE, SUITE 550, 625 INDIANA AVENUE, N.W., WASHINGTON, DC 20004 Hostile and liability witness

CAPITAL HILL POLICE OFFICER, ARRESTING OFFICER, MICHAEL DECARLO 119 D Street, NE, Washington, DC 20002. Hostile and liability witness

ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE UNITED STATES, ERIC H. HOLDER, JR, U.S. Department of Justice, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20530 Hostile and liability witness

Fay F. Ropella, CPA, CFE Inspector General, 119 D Street NE, Washington, DC 20002. Hostile and liability witness

CAPITAL HILL POLICE OFFICER, ARRESTING OFFICER, LENEEKA MANNING, 119 D Street NE Washington, DC 20002. Hostile and liability witness

Sergeant at Arms, The Honorable Paul D. Irving, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC 20515 Hostile and Liability witness

The Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper, The Honorable Terrance W. Gainer, Office of the Senate, United States Senate, Washington, D.C. 20510 Hostile and Liability witness

Architect of the Capitol, Stephen T. Ayers. SB-15 U.S. Capitol. U.S. Capitol Building. Washington, DC 20515 Hostile and Liability witness

VAUGHN WILSON, Court Member, 333 CONSTITUTION AVE NW, SUITE 2507, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20004 Hostile and Liability witness

of 33

RANDAL HOWARD PAUL, US SENATOR, 124 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC, 20510 Liability witness

And, ALL OTHER JOHN and/or JANE DOEs 1 - ? (Unknown, at this time, as the Defendant has not seen the final list of “witnesses for the Prosecution”) Hostile and/or Liability witnesses

WITNESSES FOR THE DEFENSE

No non-hostile witnesses for the Defense at this time, but subject to change before

the Trial.

PART 7

LIST OF PRIOR CONVICTIONS

The Prosecution cannot use the 2001 Ohio violation and conviction because a

“prior felony conviction” does not qualify because the Defendant did not serve “one year

and one day,” but rather served only 60 days for the violation ! See also Part 2...

PART 8

APPROPRIATE MEMORANDA

Damages Claimed

The damages I seek are simple. 1. My authority and position as a Private Attorney

General and as a Constitutional Bounty Hunter as created through congressional

legislation and by the Constitution was not recognized by the Capitol Hill police as

lawful authority even though the authorities were shown documentation and

congressional stamps to validate that position. 2. I was kidnapped by armed personnel 3.

I was NOT Mirandized until almost 3 hours later after being interrogated and my vehicle

of 33

was searched Without a valid Complaint, an Affidavit of a Complaint or a Warrant signed

by a judge. 4. I was then thrown in jail and detained and incarcerated for approximately 3

1/2 days. 5. My Jeep was impounded and all my possession were impounded and have

NOT been returned. 6. The paint job on my Jeep was ruined because of the Police tape. 7.

My Jeep transmission was ruined because of the way they incorrectly lifted it to tow it. 8.

I now have a GPS tracking device on me which violates peonage laws of involuntary

servitude under federal statutes and under the 13th Amendment. 9. I've had to travel back

and forth from North Carolina to this federal court at my own expense. 10. I've had to do

the research and filing of my own paperwork on my time because the federally assigned

Public Defender refuses to defend me and only wants me to plea down the charges. 11. I

have incurred numerous expenses to address this court case when this case should have

been dismissed for procedural violations and violations done by the Capitol Hill Police

and your own Prosecutor's office that refuses to uphold the Constitution for the United

States of America as there is no injured party which was damaged, or injured, or

threatened, or harmed, but I am being charged under a statutory violation which is merely

administrative “policy” and is an unconstitutional policy of the District of Columbia

because it violates the 2nd Amendment of the Bill of Rights and the Prosecution has been

taken the wording out of context of the 3 major gun control acts created by congressional

legislation from 1934 up to 1998. The Prosecution also lacks standing to bring these

charges.

The Prosecution is bringing claims in this Court as "Crimes against the State"

which is just an administrative “policy” violation as compared to that of an “injured” real,

of 33

flesh and blood victim as defined and determined in case law that has been put and placed

before this court.

This Court has become painfully aware of the type of documentation that I, a man

called rodney-dale; [class], am capable of filing before this Court or any other court.

The violations against the Attorney/Prosecution being cited are: constitutional

violations, statutes violations, their own Rules of Court, Federal Rules of Evidence,

Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, federal Statutes at Large violations and even case

law under other federal courts and the United States Supreme Court being only opinions

in law, are being violated but are also attempted at being used as "Convicting Law" by

replacing the “real Law" in this Court and these alleged violations have the appearance of

“Crimes against the State” with no real, injured party of interest.

I may not have a law degree and I may not know all of the secrets of how to file

proper paperwork into this court, however this court is required and supposed to take this

into consideration and allow me, to the best of my ability, to address these issues as I, or

any ordinary citizen, would understand the written law.

The overarching point before this Court is that I had a North Carolina carry

conceal permit. Both my pistol and rifle were registered through the FBI and the ATF in

Washington, DC when they were purchased because the background check was done in

D.C. So, yes, they were registered in Washington D.C. legally because all of the States

come under the federal jurisdiction and authority from Washington D.C. So, yes, my

of 33

carry conceal permit from North Carolina does in fact apply within the jurisdiction of the

District of Columbia and its ten mile square area.

The Constitution for the United States under Article 4, sections 1 and 2 gives me

“full faith and credit” to carry (a gun) and the North Carolina statutes regarding the

Castle Doctrine protected my automobile as long as the allegedly offending items were

locked up and remained in the Jeep which itself is covered by the 4th Amendment to the

Bill of Rights. These reasons alone should be enough to have this case dismissed

without adding all of the other violations against the Prosecution filed in my documents.

Further Issues...

Mr. A.J. Kramer lacks the motivation and ability to mount a proper Defense on

behalf of RODNEY DALE CLASS. When Mr. Kramer was asked about the use of the

Constitution, the USC, the Statutes at Large, the Rules of Court, etc. his statement was

“the court does not go by these.”

Which now brings up the question “IF” the District of Columbia, the federal

United States District Court, the Prosecutor's Office or the Public Defender's Office is not

“applying” these foundational and fundamental principles in law, then are people being

“charged” with “Crimes against the State” under the Trading with the Enemy Act as

found in Public Law 40, stat L 411, which was also modified in 1933 as found in Public

Law 1, 48 stat, C1 for War Crimes as there is NO substantial injured party that can stand

before the court and testify ? Does this not now violate the UMCJ, Title 10, section 333

and the doctrines of the Geneva Convention of crimes against peace and crime against

humanity to which the United States is a signatory ? Whereas this Court and the

of 33

Prosecutor's Office has demonstrated its/their willingness and consistency to disregard

the Constitution and the very laws of this country as a defense in this court supports the

statement by the Public Defender’s Office that the court system does not recognize these

as a valid or realistic defense in a courtroom even though the United States has signed

treaties at the Geneva Convention concerning human rights based on this country’s own

Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the 14th Amendment and Title 42 USC under health

and welfare.

Human rights are "inalienable rights of all members of the human family"

(Universal Declaration of Human Rights). Thus, human rights are, in principle,

applicable to every person, regardless of their nationality. The Universal

Declaration gives an example of the substance of human rights agreements

(although it is not itself a treaty, many nations have agreed to abide by its

principles, and it serves as an inspiration for treaties on human rights).

Specifically, the Universal Declaration calls on nations to respect the rights to life,

liberty, and security (Article 3). It also states that no person should be enslaved,

tortured, or deprived of the right to a trial before a "national tribunal." Thus the

Declaration proclaims negative rights, whereby national governments may not

engage in certian activities against persons. Positive rights are also part of the

Declaration. It states that everyone should enjoy the right to an education and

basic standards of living. In doing so, it calls on nations to provide for all of their

citizens without discrimination. Human rights, in substance, are protections

against abuses by all states, and guarantees that people shall receive benefits from

states. (Henkin, L. et al., Human Rights, pg. 6 (1999)).

The United States is an example of a country that is both party to international

agreements and has enacted its own human rights guarantees. The

www.law.cornell.edu/constitution reference on Constitution of the United States

guarantees basic freedoms, such as equal protection under the laws, to all United

of 33

http://www.unhchr.ch/udhr/index.htm

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution

States citizens (Amendment XIV). Additionally, the United States has passed

legislation further protecting the human rights of its citizens. A good example is

civil rights legislation (Title 42, Chapter 21 of the U.S. Code) (U.S. Code› Title

42 › Chapter 21 CIVIL RIGHTS)

The United States is also bound by treaty obligations. It has ratified the four

Geneva Conventions of 1949, is a member of the United Nations, and has signed

and/or ratified other human rights agreements. A list of major human rights

instruments that the United States has signed or ratified can be found here just to

name a few.

MENU OF SOURCES

GENEVA CONVENTIONS OF 1949

Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, of 12 August 1949

Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea, of 12 August 1949

Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, of 12 August 1949

Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949

PROTOCOLS OF 1977

Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts, of 8 June 1977

Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts, of 8 June 1977

WEB RESOURCES

Reference Guide to the Geneva Conventions Society of Professional Journalists

International Humanitarian Law International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

of 33

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex-cgi/wexlink?wexns=USC&wexname=42:21

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxiv.html

International Red Cross and Red Crescent

List of Nations Ratifying or are Otherwise Party to the Geneva Conventions and/or Protocols

Geneva Conventions Wikipedia.org article

Geneva Conventions (Council on Foreign Relations Roundtable)

OTHER TOPICS

Human rights

Category: International, Transnational, and Comparative Law

Category: Individual Rights

KANGAROO C OURT

KANGAROO COURT

DEFINITION

1) An unauthorized, mock court or legal proceeding, e.g. a tribunal of sorority sisters created to settle disputes within the sorority, in which some or all of the accused's due process rights are ignored and the outcome appears to be predetermined. The term's first known use was in the American West in the 1850s.

2) Also slang for an authorized court or legal proceeding in which fair pro-ceedings are impossible due, for example, to a partial judge or excessive press cover-age

ILLUSTRATIVE CASELAW

See, e.g. Skilling v. United States, 130 S.Ct. 2896, 2914–17 (2010) and Rideau v. Louisiana, 373 U.S. 723, 726 (1963).

Damages Sought

Compensatory Damages to the Defendant in the amount of not less than

1,000,000 Federal Reserve Notes and Punitive Damages of not less than 5,000,000

Federal Reserve Notes as a statement of the Defendant's disappointment with the of 33

http://supreme.justia.com/us/373/723/case.html

http://supreme.justia.com/us/373/723/case.html

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-1394.ZO.html

http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/due_process

http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/accused

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/kangaroo_court

government's actions. (The “dollar” amounts of the Federal Reserve Notes is to be

specified in the final Court Order.)

Other Subjects, Issues and Topics to be addressed in Court as a Defense with Exhibits

Below are more topics to be discussed as a Defense as defined in your Rules of

Court especially under the Rules of Evidence, etc. with the Exhibits to be filed into this

Court to validate my position which are, further, listed below.

RULES OF COURT

FEDERAL RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE

FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT RULES

LEGISLATIVE ACTS FOR GUN CONTROL STATUTES

National Firearm Act of 1934

Gun Control Act of 1968

Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1998

Public Law 33, Dick Act of 1902

HR11654

HR11655

of 33

P.L. 33

Congressional Records of 1917

LEGISLATIVE STATUTES ON DEFINTIONS

In Howe v. Smith, 452 U.S. 473, 480 (1981) “As in every case involving the interpretation of a statute, analysis must begin with the language employed by Congress. Rubin v. United States, 449 U.S. 424, 430, 101 S.Ct. 698, 702, 66 L.Ed.2d 633 (1981); Reiter v. Sonotone Corp., 442 U.S. 330, 337, 99 S.Ct. 2326, 2330, 60 L.Ed.2d 931 (1979).”

“Person” as defined in Legislative Acts

“Firearm” as defined in Legislative Acts

“District of Columbia” as defined in Legislative Acts

LEGISLATIVE STATUTES ON THE PEOPLE'S RIGHTS TO SUE THE

GOVERNMENT

Frankenhauser v. Rizzo, 59 F.R.D. (1973).

It is the manner of enforcement which gives Title 42 1983 its unique importance, for enforcement is placed in the hands of the people. Each citizen acts as a Private Attorney General who takes on the mantel of the sovereign,’ guarding for all of us the individual liberties enunciated in the Constitution”

Frank in Associated Industries of New York State v. Ickes, 134 F.2d 694 (2d Cir. 1943).

“Judge Frank wrote that instead of designating the Attorney General, or some other public officer, to bring an action, Congress can constitutionally enact a statute conferring on any non-official persons, or on a designated group of non-official persons, authority to bring a suit ...even if the sole purpose is to vindicate the public interest. Such persons, so authorized, are, so to speak, Private Attorney Generals.”

of 33

39th Congress, Sess. 1, Ch 31 (1866), CHAP. XXXL, An Act to protect all Person in the United States in their Civil Rights, and furnish the Means of their Vindication, April 9, 1866

Public Law 104-317, Oct 19, 1996, 110 Stat 3853; 93 stat 1284; and Public Law 96-170, 96th

LEGISLATION ON THE BOUNTY HUNTER

Bounty Hunter Responsibility Act of 1999 - Provides that, for purposes of Acts of Congress providing civil or criminal liability for the deprivation of federally protected rights under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage of a State (under color of law), a surety on a bail bond, an agent of such surety, or any bounty hunter seeking to obtain or exercise custody over a person admitted to bail under the laws of a State is acting under color of law.

CLARIFICATION OF APPLICATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS LAWS.

In General- For purposes of section 1979 of the Revised Statutes of the United States (42 U.S.C. 1983), section 242 of title 18, United States Code, and other Acts of Congress providing civil or criminal liability for the deprivation of federally protected rights under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of a State—

548 F.Supp. 157 (1982)

PUBLIC INTEREST BOUNTY HUNTERS, etc., Plaintiff,v.BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF the FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM, et al., Defendants.

Civ. A. No. C81-1184A.

United States District Court, N. D. Georgia, Atlanta Division.

September 30, 1982.

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/548/157/1650689/

Congressional authority under BOUNTY HUNTER RESPONSIBILITY ACT OF 1999

of 33

Congressional authority under BOUNTY HUNTER RESPONSIBILITY ACT OF 2005

NORTH CAROLINA STATUTES

Castle doctrine

Article 54B. Concealed Handgun Permit. carry conceal weapon permit copy

Resist arrest statutes N.C.G.S 14-223

AFFIDAVITS

1. delant-cory, family of palmerton

2. thelma-louise, family of harris

THE CONSTITUTION AND BILL OF RIGHTS

ARTICLE IV

2nd AMENDMENT

4TH AMENDMENT

5TH AMENDMENT

14th AMENDMENT As it defines public officials' positions

PART 9

ESTIMATED LENGTH OF TRIAL

30 days including Jury selection.

of 33

rodney-dale; [class] Private Attorney General for the People 432 North Lincoln Street High Shoals, North Carolina Bounty Hunter Seal Private Attorney General Seal

of 33

EXHIBITS

To be placed before the jury as evidence for a defense

of 33

Exhibit 1

RULES OF COURT

1. FEDERAL RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

1A. FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE

1B. FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

1C. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT RULES

of 33

Exhibit 2

LEGISLATIVE ACT ON GUN CONTROL STATUTES

2. National Firearm Act of 1934

2A. Gun Control Act of 1968

2B.Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1998

of 33

Exhibit 3

Public Law 33, Dick Act of 1902

3. HR11654

3A. HR11655

3B. P.L. 33

3C. Congressional Records of 1917

of 33

Exhibit 4

LEGISLATIVE STATUTES AND DEFINTIONS

OF PERSON

4. National Firearm Act of 1934

4A. Gun Control Act of 1968

4B.Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1998

4C. Statutes at Large on “person”

of 33

Exhibit 5

LEGISLATIVE STATUES ON THE PEOPLE'S RIGHTS TO SUE THE

GOVERNMENT

5. 39th Congress, Sess. 1, Ch 31 (1866), CHAP. XXXL, An Act to protect all Person in the United States in their Civil Rights, and furnish the Means of their Vindication, April 9, 1866

5A. Public Law 104-317, Oct 19, 1996, 110 Stat 3853; 93 stat 1284; and Public Law 96-170, 96th

5B. Congressional stamped document

5C. Congressional stamped document

5D. THE SECRET LIFE OF THE PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL

5E. On What A “Private Attorney General” Is And Why It Matters

5F. Important Rights and the Private Attorney General Doctrine

5G. PRIVATE ATTORNEYS GENERAL, PREVAILING PARTIES, AND PUBLIC BENEFIT: ATTORNEY'S FEES AWARDS FOR CIVIL RIGHTS PLAINTIFFS

5H. Statutes at Large 93-1284 P.L.96-170

5I. Statutes at Large 110 stat 3853 P.L. 104-317

of 33

Exhibit 6

LEGISLATION ON THE BOUNTY HUNTER

6. Congressional authority under BOUNTY HUNTER RESPONSIBILITY ACT OF 1999

6A. Congressional authority under BOUNTY HUNTER RESPONSIBILITY ACT OF 2005

6B. PUBLIC INTEREST BOUNTY HUNTERS, etc., Plaintiff, v. BOARD OF

GOVERNORS OF the FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM, et al., Defendants

6C. THE HISTORY OF AMERICAN BOUNTY HUNTING AS A STUDY IN STUNTED LEGAL GROWTH

of 33

Exhibit 7

NORTH CAROLINA STATUTES

7. Castle doctrine

7A. Article 54B. Concealed Handgun Permit. 7B. Resist arrest statutes N.C.G.S 14-223

7C. copy of carry conceal weapon permit

of 33

Exhibit 8

CONSTITUTION AND BILL OF RIGHTS

9. ARTICLE IV

9A. 2nd AMENDMENT

9B. 4TH AMENDMENT

9C. 5TH AMENDMENT

9D. 14th AMENDMENT As it defines public officials' status (positions)

of 33

Exhibit 9

Affidavits

1. delant-cory, family of palmerton

1A. thelma-louise, family of harris

PROOF OF SERVICE

Now Comes rodney–dale; [class], a real man of flesh and blood, in the position of Private

Attorney General and Bounty Hunter by Congressional Legislation under the Statutes at

Large and by United States Codes created by the United States Congress within the

of 33

District of Columbia Territory, to set forth my Wishes of Entry of this document and

WISHES and REQUIRES that this document is to be read and acted upon by an

honorable, flesh and blood man or woman to afford the Declarant remedy RE:

PRETRIAL STATEMENT AS ORDERED BY JUDGE KESSLER ON MAY 15, 2014.

This document was sent to the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT OF THE

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Clerk of Courts on this _____ day of June in the year of our

Lord 2014 A.D. i, rodney-dale; [class], also delivered a copy to the Prosecutor.

rodney-dale; [class] Private Attorney General for the People 432 North Lincoln Street High Shoals, North Carolina 28077 [email protected]

Cc:

PETER LALLAS (Or designee) ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 555 4TH STREET, N.W., ROOM 4110 WASHINGTON, DC 20530

of 33

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT - Scanned Retina … · Web view06/11/2014 · UNITED STATES...

Documents

Transcript of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT - Scanned Retina … · Web view06/11/2014 · UNITED STATES...