Jesha Miller vs. Barack Obama
Jesha Miller has filed a Civil Suit Complaint against President Barack Obama for failing to execute his # 1 duty, which is to enforce Federal Law. President Obama has been petitioned several time & failed to respond when demanding that he perform his duty under Article II, Sec. 3, of the Constitution, to enforce Federal Law under Title 18, sec. 243 which brings criminal charges against officials for excluding jurors on the basis of race. The violation violates the 5th,and 14th Amendment due process & is at war with Democracy because Slavery has been abolished. The statute was made to deter officials from violating the unalienable right to a fair trial by imposing criminal charges. The trial transcripts affirm Judge David Kiely of EvansvilleIndiana's Vanderburgh County but those other officials whose duty it is to enforce the Statute have failed to bring charges against Judge David Kiely, aiding a criminal from justice. Those others included in Jesha Miller's, me against the world Civil Complaint include U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller, FBI agent Brian Flaherty, Judge David Kiely, & Judge Renee A. Ferguson & Deputy Prosecutor Matt Keppler who threaten to make Jesha Miller a political prisoner February 7, 2011 for contempt of court for child support. Judge Ferguson & Matt Keppler are abusing their power because Mr. Miller informed the court he was paying child support & they know he petitioned using the checks & balances because the entire Judicial Branch of government is corrupt & must be checked for corruption directly related to their duties, which is Judicial corruption.
Respectfully Blogged- Jesha MillerJanuary 29, 2011
entire lawsuit is below
JESHA DONALDSON MILLER
_________________________
Full Name (s)
1011 Lincoln Ave. Apt. D
_________________________
Street address or postal number
Evansville In. 47714
_________________________
City, State, and zip code
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
Civil Action No. _________________________
( To be supplied by the Court )
Jesha Donaldson Miller Plaintiff (s)
Full Name (s)
v.
U.S. of America Defendant (s)
Judge David Kiely
U.S. Supreme Court
Judge Sarah Evans Barker
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder
President Barack Obama
Senator Richard Lugar
Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller
_____________________________________________
CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT
_____________________________________________
" A. PARTIES "
1. I, Jesha Miller, am a citizen of Indiana and presently reside at :
( Plaintiff name )
1011 Lincoln Ave. Apt. D. Evansville In. 47714
DEFENDANTS
2. Defendant, David Kiely is a citizen of Indiana and presently reside at:
Vanderburgh County Courts Building
825 Sycamore St.
Evansville In. 47708
3. U.S. Supreme Court address is :
Justice (or Chief Justice) (Justice's Full Name) Supreme Court of the United States One First Street N.E. Washington, DC 20543
4. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder is a citizen of the U.S. & resides at:
950 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W.
Washington D.C. 20530-0001
5. President Barack Obama is President of the U.S. & resides at:
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W.
Washington D.C. 20500
Email: Alyssa Mastromonaco scheduling@who.eop.gov
6. Senator Richard Lugar is a citizen of the U.S. whose address is:
The Honorable Richard G. Lugar
United States Senate
306 Hart Senate Office Bld.
Washington D.C. 20510-1401 202-224-4814
7. Former Congressman Brad Ellsworth is a citizen whose address is
unknown:
8. Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller is a citizen of the U.S. whose
address is:
Betsy Isenberg- Deputy Attorney- Betsy.Isenberg@atg.in.gov
Indiana Government Center South 302 W. Washington St., 5th Floor Indianapolis, IN 46204 Phone: 317.232.6201
page 2
9. FBI Agent Brian Flaherty & then U.S. Attorney Timothy Morrison
are citizens whose address is:
304 Federal Blvd.
101 N.W. M.L.K. Jr. Blvd.
Evansville In. 47708
10. Raymond Hulser is with the Public Integrity Section whose address is:
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W.
Washington D.C. 20530-0001
webmaster@usdoj.gov
11. Judge Allen Ferguson & Deputy Matt F. Keppler are officials whose work address is : Office of the Prosecuting Attorney Prosecuting Attorney 1st Judicial Circuit Civic Center Complex Administration Building - Room 108 Evansville, IN. 47708
Renee A. Ferguson
825 Sycamore St. Evansville, IN 47708
JURISDICTION
1. This cause of action is brought by the power & authority of the U.S.
Constitution & Bill of Rights guaranteeing the right to freedom, justice, equality, & the pursuit of happiness. Constitutional Law # 250.2 (4)
which provides: Every Black Man has a right under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, U.S.C.A., that in the selection of jurors to pass on his life, liberty, or property, there shall be no exclusion of his race, & no discrimination against them because of their color. Virginia v. Rives,100 U.S. 313.
2. Art. 1 Sec 9 - Powers denied government -
The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.
Art. II, Sec. 3- Duties of the President- he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.
The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law " infringing on the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.
The Fifth Amendment (Amendment V) to the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, protects against abuse of government authority in a legal procedure. Nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
The Sixth Amendment (Amendment VI) to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights which sets forth rights related to criminal prosecutions. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868 as one of the Reconstruction Amendments. The Thirteenth Amendment (both proposed and ratified in 1865) abolished slavery. The Fourteenth Amendment (proposed in 1866 and ratified in 1868) included the Privileges or Immunities Clause, Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses.
3. 18 USC sec. 242 provides that whoever, under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States ...shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.18 USC sec. 245 provided that Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, intimidates or interferes with any person from participating in or enjoying any benefit, service, privilege, program, facility, or activity provided or administered by the United States; [or] applying for or enjoying, or any perquisite thereof, by any agency of the United States; shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.42 USC sec. 1983 provides that every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Colombia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress.
4. Checks & Balances. The system of checks and balances is a fundamental part of our government. One very important part of the system of checks and balances is the power of any citizen to challenge any law that they feel is unfair. This system allows the different parts of government to work better together, prevents one part of government from becoming too powerful and prevents one part of government from abusing its power.One law in the system of checks and balances is the law that allows citizens to challenge any law that they feel is unjust. Once the law that they don't like is passed they can challenge it and bring the law to court. The law is then debated between a lawyer representing the law and the plaintiff. If the court finds that the law is unjust the law is then abolished. This part of checks and balances prevents congress from abusing its power by making unjust laws.
C. NATURE OF THE CASE
The Plaintiff has been denied the basic, but most important rights to freedom, justice, equality, & the pursuit of happiness by officials whose duty it is to protect & uphold the Constitutions integrity. This starts with Judge David Kiley & ends with President Barack Obama whose number 1 duty it is to enforce Federal Law & uphold the Constitutions integrity.
Because this is directly related to each officials duty the officials have committed Judicial & Political CORRUPTION.
Judge David Kiely violates the 5th, 6th, & 14th, Amendments which are guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, rights government must protect. This is done to take my freedom in violation of the Constitution & Laws of the U.S.,
illegally imprisoning me for seven (7) years. He commits a Federal Crime pursuant to Title 18, sec. 243, which is the exclusion of jurors on account of race. The trial transcripts affirm this to be fact, so this Civil Complaint will not fail as these rights are guaranteed by the Bill of Rights assuring the outcome. This is an unalienable right of which I cannot be separated from under no circumstances which is "all men are created equal" & guaranteed
under the Bill of Rights 6th, Amendment right to a fair trial. Specifically I was held in violation of Constitutional Law # 250. 2 (4) which provides:
Every Black Man has a right under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, U.S.C.A., that in the selection of jurors to pass on his life, liberty, or property, there shall be no exclusion of his race, & no discrimination against them because of their color. Virginia v. Rives, 100 U.S. 313.
Judge David Kiely FAILS TO PERFORM HIS CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY- recognized by sec. 4 of the CIVIL RIGHTS ACT of March 1, 1875...NOT TO PURSUE A CONDUCT IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF THEIR OFFICE which would OPERATE TO DISCRIMINATE in the SELECTION OF JURORS ON RACIAL GROUNDS. This is Judicial corruption directly related to his duty. Moreover, if petitioner's allegations are true, the responsible officials are subject to criminal penalties. 18 U.S.C. § 243.
For whatever may be the law with regard to other exclusions from jury service, it is clear beyond all doubt that the exclusion of Negroes cannot pass constitutional muster. Accordingly, if petitioner's allegations are correct, and Negroes were systematically excluded from his grand and petit juries, then he was indicted and convicted by tribunals that fail to satisfy the elementary requirements of due process, and neither the indictment nor the conviction can stand.
The petitioner used the appellate process all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, case No. 04-7377. The Supreme Court refused to hear the case petitioned by Habeas Corpus. Dereliction of DUTY is committed by former Justices, Sandra Day O'Connor & John Paul Stevens whose duty it is when addressed in a Habeas Corpus petition, should be alert to examine the facts for him or herself, when if true as alleged, they make the trial absolutely Void, reverse the conviction & discharge from the illegal restraint.
This was not only Judicial Corruption directly related to their duty, but an abuse of power under Article I, section 9. Powers denied to the Federal Government. The privilege of the writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended because there was no rebellion or invasion.
The Framers of the Constitution had 3 intentions when they wrote the Bill of Rights. Protect the freedom of each person, 2nd prevent abuse of power, & 3rd, protect the rights of the accused in a criminal proceeding.
The Supreme Court violates all three which is detrimental to the system because with Judicial corruption in the highest Court there is no longer an Avenue to Justice. A "writ of habeas corpus" is a court order obtained by a person in custody, demanding to know the reasons for imprisonment. If those reasons are insufficient the prisoner is released. The Courts motive for Judicial Corruption is to cover-up the Federal Crime pursuant to Title 18, sec. 243 & deny 10 million dollars to me, Jesha Miller, upon my release from the illegal restraint. Habeas Corpus lies to test proceedings so fundamentally lawless that imprisonment pursuant to them is not merely erroneous but is void & therefore, the previous judgment cannot be applied to justify the restraint. The records affirm the allegations to be fact. The Court commits an Act of Injustice with EVIL intent. The crime is against the peace & dignity of the U.S. & is at war with Democracy as Slavery has been abolished. Prohibited by the 13th Amendment, remanding the petitioner, Jesha Donaldson Miller to illegal imprisonment.
This oppression also effects me economically because the U.S. Supreme Courts motive was to deny 10 million upon my release from the illegal restraint in addition to cover-up the Federal Crime.
C. NATURE OF THE CASE ( continued )
President Barack Obama was petitioned to execute his number one duty upon under Article II, sec. 3 to enforce Federal Law which is executed by the Bill of Rights upon entering office but has disparaged the situation.
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder was petitioned to enforce federal law
as he is the Head of the U.S. Department of Justice & is the Chief law enforcement officer of the U.S. government also has failed to enforce Title 18, sec. 243. This must be done in order to protect our right to freedom which was the purpose of making it a crime.
I then used the Constitutions checks & balances as intended by the Framers to Protect our right to freedom, prevent abuse of power, & to hold officials accountable for their actions but government refused to recognize the Constitutions checks & balances to continue corruption.
I next petitioned with a Civil Complaint but my rights were violated under color of law by Judge Sarah Evans Barker & U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder continued to refuse to enforce the rule of law by indicting & arresting
Judge David Kiely & Judge Sarah Barker for violating my rights under color of law to continue the cover-up of the crime committed by Judge David Kiely & also the Constitutions checks & Balances which would prove corruption throughout the Judicial Branch of government. It was dismissed as frivolous which means of little importance & unable to prove but these are the most important rights in our constitution, which are the rights to freedom, justice, equality, & the pursuit of happiness. This had to be done to continue the government cover-up as the suit included the media whom, if she allowed to go to trial would expose the checks & balances which in return would prove
corruption throughout the Judicial Branch of government. This stops an unprecedented event in history by the use of the checks & balances used due to corruption throughout the Judicial Branch of government to stop abuse of power, enforce the Federal crime holding officials accountable &
remove the Felony from my record as well as pay me for the illegal restraint.
Senator Richard Lugar was petitioned to take this to the Floor so it would be recognized for action to be taken because the entire Branch is found to be corrupt so that there is no longer an Avenue to Justice with corruption in the U.S. Supreme Court but also refused. This violates the code of conduct which requires:
Government employees are expected to be loyal to people, parties and departments of the U.S. government. They should uphold the U.S. Constitution, laws and regulations. Under the code of ethics, Government employees are expected to expose corruption when it is discovered. Congress made it a crime for officials to exclude jurors on account of race so he refuses to uphold the Constitution in addition to refusing to expose corruption.
With corruption running rampant, I petitioned the Public Integrity
Section, headed by Raymond Hulser, whose mission is to oversee the federal effort to combat corruption through the prosecution of elected & appointed public officials at all levels of government have refused to indict & arrest David Kiely & those aiding by concealment.
The Indiana Attorney General & Deputy Attorney Betsy Isenberg were Motioned to Indict & Arrest Judge David Kiely & refused so that my rights to equal protection of the law were not protected. FBI agent Brian Flagerty & then U.S. Attorney Timothy Morrison refused to enforce federal law concerning another official.
Finally, The buck stops with President Barack Obama to uphold the integrity of the Constitution & execute his number one duty under Art. II, sec. 3.
To enforce Federal Law. An Emergency petition was sent to President Obama which he refused to again address violating the first Amendment which guarantees the right to redress government & refused his duty as President to enforce Federal Law.
Because of corruption in each branch of government I now am forced to bring Civil Suit against the United States of America for not only violating the guaranteed rights of our Constitution, but refusing to uphold the integrity of our Constitution of the U.S. by refusing to recognize the Bill of Rights, rights that government must protect, the Constitutions checks & balances intended to protect the right to freedom, prevent abuse of power, & hold officials accountable
for their actions, & refusing his duty under Article II, sec. 3- which is to enforce Federal Law. This does not mean that he literally enforces federal law but that he sees to it that the law is enforced which he failed to do even in light that he could be impeached from office, he continued to be a part of Judicial & Political corruption directly related to his duty.
All officials were given opportunity to withdraw from aiding & abetting a criminal from justice by performing their duty & indicting Judge David Kiely pursuant to Title 18, sec. 243 but, instead have chosen concealment rather than uphold the Constitution of the U.S.
Cause of Action- ( continued )
Claim II. Dereliction of Duty by former U.S. Supreme Court Justices Sandra Day O'Connor & John Paul Stevens to deny my right to perfect an appeal under color of law. Supreme Court violates Article I, sec. 9- Powers Denied to the Federal Government ( 2 ) The privilege of the writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended. This oppression-[ come down on or keep down by unjust use of ones authority; "The government oppresses political activists] denied the plaintiff 10 million dollars for the illegal restraint.
Because it is directly related to their duty, this is Judicial Corruption in the highest Court which makes the Judicial system no longer an avenue to justice, requiring the checks & balances to check the Judicial Branch for abuse of power violating the right to freedom & to hold officials accountable for those violations. The motive for corruption was to cover-up the Federal Crime & oppress me economically by denying 10 million dollars for the illegal restraint. This includes another 40 million in punitive damages to prevent any further corruption by officials in the future so that the integrity of our Constitution is upheld as all government employees have sworn to support the Constitution.
Supporting Facts: Trial transcripts already affirm officials violated the 5th,
6th, 13th, & 14th Amendments. ( Refer to Claim I, supporting Facts )
Petitioner addressed Habeas Corpus to former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor & John Paul Stevens who failed to checks the records & release me from the illegal restraint. Dereliction of duty is committed by then, Justices, Sandra Day O'Connor & John Paul Stevens whose duty it is when addressed in a Habeas Corpus petition, should be alert to examine the facts
for him or herself, when if true as alleged, they make the trial absolutely VOID, reverse the conviction & discharge from the illegal restraint. (Former )
Justice Stone wrote for the court that the use of the writ as an incident of the federal judicial power is implicitly recognized by Article I, section 9, CL.2
of the Constitution. The privilege of the writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended. Here they exercise a power denied government abusing their power & deny the right to freedom in the process.
Specifically the petitioner was held in violation of Constitutional Law
250.2 (4) which provides: Every Black Man has a right under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, U.S.C.A., that in the selection of jurors to pass on his life, liberty, or property, there shall be no exclusion of his race, & no discrimination against them because of their color. Virginia v. Rives, 100 U.S. 313.
Habeas Petition addressed to former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor & John Paul Stevens filed dated by the U.S. Supreme Court January 6, 2005
affirm I petitioned by Habeas Corpus for my immediate release from the illegal restraint. They had full knowledge of the crime & 10 million dollars to be paid upon my release which was they're motive for corruption & were in full knowledge from page 2 of the 14th Amendment violation denying due process. [ File Stamp 3 page copy submitted ] It is on the caption that (p.1)
the U.S. Supreme Court is informed that the previous proceeding was so lawless that imprisonment pursuant to them is Void, & therefore the previous
judgment is inapplicable to continue any further restraint. The Court, on page 3 were notified the crime is against the peace & dignity of the U.S.
and the Statute. This affirms the Courts motive to cover-up the crime & deny
reparations for the illegal restraint in violation of the 13th Amendment.
Attachments informed the Court of Art. I, sec. 9- Powers denied government, Exhibit A, a Waiver that the Indiana Attorney Generals Office signed because they could not justify the restraint & the trial transcripts affirming the 14th Amendment violation. This is an affirmation the U.S. Supreme Court had no commitment to the demands of the Constitution when it comes to the freedom of a Black Man.
This is detrimental to the intent of the Framers of the Constitution to protect the right to freedom, prevent abuse of power, & protect the rights of the accused. This justifies the use & operation of the Constitutions checks & balances to check the Judicial Branch for abuse of power, corruption, restore those rights officials violated, & hold those officials accountable for their actions.
D. Cause of Action ( continued P. 5 & 6 )
Claim III. Judge Richard Young was assigned my case but there was a conflict of interest because he was the Chief Judge of Vanderburgh County
when Judge David Kiely committed the crime pursuant to Title 18, sec. 243
so I doubted he would enforce the Rule of Law.
Judge Sarah Evans Barker then was assigned to the case & refused to carry
out the rule of law pursuant to Title 18, sec. 243 & indict & arrest Judge David Kiely. Judge Barker next dismissed the case, citing it to be frivolous
violating my rights under color of law as I demanded a trial by jury. I gave her warning of violating my rights under color of law & opportunity to withdraw from aiding & abetting Judge Kiely from justice nearly 3 time but she continued to conceal the crime & the checks & balances that questions the
integrity of the entire Judicial Branch of government. With the checks & balances petitioned & government refusing to acknowledge then there is no use appealing because with Judicial corruption in the U.S. Supreme Court there is no longer an Avenue to justice. It was made clear that only she could
uphold its integrity & if not this again affirms that the entire Judicial Branch of government is corrupt which justifies the use & operation of the checks & balances intended by the Framers of the Constitution to protect the peoples right to freedom & prevent abuse of power.
In to conceal the checks & balances my Constitutional Rights # 925 was
violated by the media which enables: enables every citizen at anytime to BRING THE GOVERNMENT & ANY PERSON IN AUTHORITY TO THE BAR OF PUBLIC OPINION BY ANY JUST CRITICISM UPON THEIR CONDUCT IN THE EXERCISE OF AUTHORITY WHICH THE PEOPLE HAVE CONFERRED UPON THEM.
Judge Barker also interferes with my Constitutional Right # 925 to keep
government corruption concealed.
Supporting Facts: All filings in U.S. District Court, Southern District In.
Filed April 29, 2010 Proceed to Prosecute
Plaintiff, Jesha Miller, demands the Court issue indictment & arrest of all defendants given legal warning of denying rights under color of law. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. sec. 242, 243, & 245.
Strauder v. West Virginia, 100 U. S. 303, 100 U. S. 308 (1880). Moreover, if petitioner's allegations are true, the responsible officials are subject to criminal penalties. 18 U.S.C. § 243. A closer look at the statute is warranted. From all indications, § 243 was intended to serve two purposes: first, to make explicit what was implicit in the Fourteenth Amendment, that persons cannot be denied the right to serve on juries because of their race; and second, to prevent racial exclusions from juries by providing criminal penalties for persons violating the statutory command. See Ex parte Virginia, 100 U. S. 339 (1880); Neal v. Delaware, 103 U. S. 370, 103 U. S. 386 (1881).
Filed May 6, 2010 CARRY OUT PROSECUTION
Plaintiff GRANTED TO PROCEED in forma pauperis, and the Court reassigned it to the docket of Judge Sarah Evans Barker on April 30, 2010.
Plaintiff filed April 29, 2010 for the Court to indict & arrest all defendants given legal warning. Title 18 U.S.C. 242, 243, & 245.
Filed May 20, 2010 Motion for Court to enforce the Rule of Law
Indict & Arrest under Title 18 Sec. 242, 243, & 245
Entry- Action dismissed May 13, 2010. Denied Plaintiff's motion to enforce the rule of law. Clearly Judge Barker was motion to enforce the rule of law before being dismissed on May 13, 2010 as she claimed, but the ENTRY was on May 27, 2010. In doing so Judge Barker denies my rights under color of law violating the 7th Amendment.
The Seventh Amendment (Amendment VII) to the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, codifies the right to a jury trial in certain civil trials. 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.
Original Civil complaint showed the value in controversy to be totaling nearly
30 million dollars. 2 million from each defendant with nearly 30 defendants.
Judge Barker also dismissed the case on the grounds of being frivolous which means of little importance & unable to prove. At issue is the unalienable right "all men are created equal & the violation of the 13th & 14th Amendments. The trial transcripts affirm the crime committed by Judge David Kiely to be true.
D. SUPPORTING FACTS- continued- ( P. 7 )
The exclusion of jurors on account of race is a crime pursuant to Title 18
sec. 243. I, Jesha Miller am a Black Man. Page 246 of the Trial transcripts
state; Mr. Vowels: The question to the Judge. At this point there is no black people in the jury & there were no black people in the jury panel. I can tell you that I don't believe the law will support it...
Judge Sarah Evans Barker says she don't see this violation. ***
Page 247 of the trial transcripts state; Mr. Vowels: My client objects to the fact that none of the venire men nor the jury are black people. He--and that is based upon an assertion that he is entitled to a jury of his peers. The component of race should be included in the concept of peer.
Judge Barker closes her eyes to this also. ***
Prosecutor Maurer: If blacks are chosen for the venire, they're chosen. If they're not, they're not. But there's no Constitutional right to have any given racial make-up of a jury.
Constitutional Law # 250. 2 (4) which provides: Every Black Man has a right under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, U.S.C.A., that in the selection of jurors to pass on his life, liberty, or property, there shall be no exclusion of his race, & no discrimination against them because of their color. Virginia v. Rives, 100 U.S. 313.
Federal law provides that it is a crime to violate the rights of a citizen under color-of law. You can be arrested for this crime and you can also be held personally liable for civil damages.Clearly Prosecutor Maurer violates my rights with his statement intending to exclude my race which violates the 14th Amendments right to due process & Constitutional Law 250.2 (4) that he says is not.
18 USC sec. 242 provides that whoever, under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States ...shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
Page 249-250 I don't believe that our venire men are properly selected as the federal government intends for our jurors to be selected. By that I mean I don't think Indiana's in full compliance with the federal government's motor/
voter registration law. As a result of that we don't get a fair cross-section in the venire &, as a result of that my client's rights under the Federal & State Constitution to a fair & impartial jury as mandated through the 14th Amendment & through the federal legislation- I think that's been violated. So, for the record, I make that argument as well.
28 § 1861. Declaration of Policy- All litigants in Federal Courts entitled to trial by jury "shall" have a right to grand & petit juries selected at random from a fair cross section of the community.
The record affirms there is no cross section of the community and that there are no blacks.
28 § 1862 Discrimination Prohibited - No citizen "shall" be excluded from service as a grand or petit juror on account of race, color, religion, sex, &`national origin.
28 § 1863 Plan for random jury selection.- Each U.S. District Court "shall" place into operation a written plan for random selection of grand & petit jurors that "shall" be designed to achieve the objectives of sections 1861 & 1862 of this title. The panel "shall" examine the plan to ascertain that
it complies with the provisions of this title & "shall" state the particulars in which the plan fails to comply & present within a reasonable time an alternative plan remedying the defects.
Here Judge David Kiely overrules the Federal & State Constitution which is mandated through the 14th Amendment which is guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. Where jury commissioners disqualify citizens on the grounds of race, they fail "to perform their constitutional duty -- recognized by § 4 of the Civil Rights Act of March 1, 1875 . Judge Sarah Evans Barker sees these violations & is CLEARLY aiding & abetting Judge Kiely from the criminal crime committed pursuant to title 18, § 243. ***
Judge David Kiely committed the crime with no intention to comply with the demands of the constitution demonstrated by his actions making no effort to
reme
This is a Civil Complaint & Judge David Kiely fails his Constitutional Duty
recognized by § 4 of the Civil Rights Act of March 1, 1875 . The case is wrongfully dismissed by Judge Barker.
This violates the 5th, 6th, 13th & 14th Amendments under the Bill of Rights.
CLAIM IV. U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER failed to appear before the U.S. Supreme Court when petitioned to do so because
of corruption in the U.S. Supreme Court or inform the media & public about the Judicial Corruption that had taken place.
U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER failed to enforce the federal
law when petitioned to do so through the Court because of other officials
aiding each other from justice due to crime they committed under Title 18.
Because he conceals rather than enforce the Law under Title 18 which is directly related to his duty to enforce federal law this is Judicial corruption. An act detrimental to justice & coming from the head of the Justice Department only breeds more corruption from officials who violate "we the peoples" rights without being held accountable.
These acts interfere with me obtaining the Civil Rights violated by Judge David Kiely & Judge Sarah Evans Barker & the U.S. Supreme Court. Again violating my Rights under Color of Law.
18 USC sec. 242 provides that whoever, under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States ...shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
SUPPORTING FACTS: U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder was petitioned.
This is a matter of exceptional importance requiring you appear in person before the U.S. Supreme Court due to corruption in the U.S. Supreme Court who have denied the right to freedom, abuse of power, & refusing to protect the rights of the accused. An illegal Act by an office holder constitutes political corruption if the Act is directly related to their official duties.
Sec. 535 Investigation of crimes involving government officers & employees. (a) The Attorney General & the F.B.I. may investigate any violation of Title 18 involving Government officers & employees.(b) Any information, allegation, or complaint received in a department or agency of the executive branch of the government relating to violations of Title 18 involving Government officers & employees "shall" meaning must be expeditiously reported to the Attorney General by the head of the Department. ( WHOM EVER RECEIVES THIS MUST GIVE IMMEDIATELY TO ERIC HOLDER, ATTORNEY GENERAL.)So that we are clear, you need to appear before the U.S. Supreme Court due to corruption in the U.S. Supreme Court, inform President Barack Obama that he needs to address my Petition for Executive Order, & call a Press conference to inform the media & people about the corruption in the U.S. Supreme Court.07/31/2009
This is on blog at: http://jeshamilleryah.blogspot.com/
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER PETITIONED DUE TO CORRUPTION IN U.S. SUPREME COURT
There was no investigation & he failed to appear before the Supreme Court.
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder was petitioned to enforce the Law &
indict Judge Sarah Evans Barker & Judge David Kiely pursuant to Title 18,
sec. 242 & 243 of which he failed to do also.
Motion for U.S. Attorney General Eric H. Holder to indictJudge Sarah Evans Barker pursuant to Title 18 sec. 242Comes Now, Jesha Miller, and petitions U.S. Attorney General Eric H. Holder to indict Judge Sarah Evans Barker for violating 18 USC sec. 242, depriving the right to bring Civil & criminal charges against Judge David Kiely pursuant to Title 18 sec. 243 & other defendants whom have aided & abetted by concealment of the crime & checks & balances. Because they refuse to enforce the law it is the U.S. Attorney Generals duty to enforce the law & uphold the integrity of the Judicial Branch of government. The following reasons justify the indictment of Judge Sarah Evans Barker, Judge David Kiely, & all other defendants involved in the concealment of the use of our Constitutions checks & balances due to abuse of power by officials using that position to deny the natural rights of "we the people" to freedom, justice, equality, & the pursuit of happiness.
This is on blog at: http://ericholdercorruptjudicialbranch.blogspot.com/
Since the 1870 Act that established the Department of Justice as an executive department of the government of the United States, the Attorney General has guided the world's largest law office and the central agency for enforcement of federal laws.
Clearly refusing to enforce the law justifies my civil complaint.
Claim V. President Barack Obama violates my first Amendment right to redress government by ignoring my petitions requiring he execute his # 1 duty executed by the Bill of Rights to enforce federal law.
President Obama disparages my petition using the Constitutions checks & balances as intended by the Framers of the Constitution to prevent abuse of power & protect the rights of "we the people".
President Barack Obama violates my Rights under color of law by refusing to address my Emergency Petition- The Buck Stops with President Obama.
The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits infringing- meaning violate, interfering with or prohibiting- meaning to prevent the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. Redress- meaning- to set right, correct, or remedy.
SUPPORTING FACTS- President Barack Obama was petitioned to execute his # 1 duty when first entering his office due to corruption in the U.S. Supreme Court. This was sent by mail & placed on google.com. President Obama was petitioned to honor the Constitutions checks & balances intended by the Framers of the Constitution to prevent abuse of power & Protect the rights of "we the people".
Affirmation he received this is by Certified mail:
Executive Branch- Chief Executive, Barack Obama CERTIFIED MAILThe White House 7009 1680 0000 0896 23521600 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W.Washington D.C. 20500
Friday, October 23, 2009
Checks & Balances used due to gov. Corruption
Jesha Miller1011 Lincoln Ave. Apt. DVanderburgh CountyEvansville In. 47714yhwhyesha@yahoo.com812-604-4963
To: Executive Branch- Chief Executive- Barack Obama Judicial Branch- U. S. Supreme CourtLegislative Branch- Speaker of the House- Nancy PelosiHead of the Senate- Vice President -Joseph BidenClerk of the House- Lorraine C. Miller- Set Special Session Nov. 20, 2009 *U.S. Senate Clerk-Nancy EricksonRe: Petitioning the Checks & Balances to protect American Freedom , check the actions of other branches & Article 6, the Supremacy Law that every President, judge, member of Congress, as well as other government officials, must swear to obey the Constitution. { Special Session to confront Checks & Balances November 20, 2009.}
EMERGENCY PETITION- The Buck Stops With President Obama.
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
The Buck Stops with President Obama
THE BUCK STOPS WITH THE PRESIDENTPresident Barack Obama has been petitioned due to Judicial & Political corruption to uphold the integrity of the Constitution & enforce federal law which is his # 1 duty. Jesha Miller initiates this petition due to all agencies refusing to enforce federal law which includes U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, the FBI, Public Integrity Section, U.S. Attorney Timothy Morrison, & the Indiana Attorney General's Office. Jesha Miller states the motive is to cover-up Judicial corruption in the entire Judicial Branch including the U.S. Supreme Court. The buck stops with President Barack Obama who must uphold the integrity of the Constitution which requires that branch to be checked for corruption. Mr. Miller's petition using the Checks & Balances questions the integrity of the Judicial Branch for abuse of power, cover-up of a Federal Crime pursuant to Title 18, sec. 243 by Vanderburgh County Judge David Kiely which is the exclusion of jurors on account of race, & the motive was not only to cover-up the crime but to deny Jesha Miller 10 million dollars upon his release from the illegal restraint. Money & power, the cause of all evil, but the Buck Stops with President Obama who must uphold the integrity of the Constitution of the U.S. of America. This petition was sentCertified Mail 7010 1670 0001 8290 9302 on Nov. 24, 2010Respectfully Submitted- Jesha MillerDate: December 1, 2010
Art. II, Sec. 3- Duties of the President- he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.
Because he fails to execute his duty he violates my rights under color of law,
violating the first Amendment Right to redress government, a right guaranteed under the Bil of Rights, rights government must protect.
The violation of guaranteed rights assures this petition will not fail & the fact that there is evidence previously presented in the transcript that the unalienable right "all men are created equal" was violated, a right of which I cannot be separated from assures the outcome will be successful.
Because it is directly related to his duty constitutes Political corruption on the part of President Barack Hussein Obama.
President Obama Petitioned to enforce Federal Law
Jun 9, 2010 ... Reference to: Address the Constitutions Checks & Balances immediately because the petitioner, Jesha Miller, has petitioned using the Checks ...presobama2doduty.blogspot.com/
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
President Obama warned of Denying Rights
Form COL \ Violation Warning \ Denial of rights Under Color of Law> Violation Warning ---18 U.S.C. sec.242; 18 U.S.C. sec. 245; 42 U.S.C. sec. 1983____________________________________________________________Name and address of Citizen Name and address of Notice RecipientJesha Miller President Barack Obama1011 Lincoln Ave. Apt. D 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W. Evansville In. 47714 Washington D.C. 20500 (812) 467-1424 202-456-2461 Fax # yhwhyesha@yahoo.com__________________ president@messages.whitehouse.govClaim 6 - Senator Lugar refused to take my Petition using the checks & balances to the floor so that it is addressed by government.
Violates the code of ethics by refusing to expose corruption wherever discovered so as to prevent the operation of the checks & balances to prevent me from securing those rights violated by officials.
These actions refusing to assist a constituent interfere with my securing the guaranteed rights violated under the Bill of Rights.
18 USC sec. 242 provides that whoever, under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States ...shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.Senator Lugar was sent Violation Warning- Denial of Rights under Color of Law & still refused to take the Petition to the floor subjecting me to the denial the unalienable right "all men are created equal" which is guaranteed by the Constitutions 6th Amendment right to a fair trial by an impartial jury & the operation of the Constitutions checks & balances intended by the Framers of the Constitution to prevent abuse of power & protect the rights of "we the people".
Supporting Facts - Copy of Petition for Senator Lugar to take to the Floor my petition for Checks & Balances.
Senator Lugar is petitioned as part of Bipartisanship to uphold Constitutions checks & balances & failed to uphold the integrity of the Constitution. The petition questions the integrity of the Judicial Branch of government & must be checked tot assure there is no corruption or abuse of power that has taken place.
All officials have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution no matter what party they belong to so Senator Lugar not only violates my rights under color of law preventing the operation of the checks & balances which is the law.
18 USC sec. 242 provides that whoever, under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States ...shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
Form COL \ Violation Warning \
Denial of rights Under Color of Law
> Violation Warning ---18 U.S.C. sec.242; 18 U.S.C. sec. 245; 42 U.S.C. sec. 1983
_________________________________________________________________________________
Name and address of Citizen Name and address of Notice Recipient
Jesha Miller Senator Richard Lugar
1011 Lincoln Ave. Apt. D 101 NW MLK Blvd. Rm. 122 Evansville In. 47714 Evansville In. 47708 (812) 467-1424 (812 465-6313)
Citizen's statement: Senator Richard Lugar, being my representative, willfully refused to take my petition using the Constitutions checks & balances to the floor of the Senate depriving the right to prevent abuse of power, restore rights violated by government, hold officials accountable for criminal acts committed & help Democracy protect American freedoms in the Judicial Branch of government. This act violating 18 USC sec. 245 interferes with my petition using the Checks & Balances which was timely sensitive set for January 31, 2010 & allows the continuance of corruption in the Judicial Branch of government & oppresses my right to redress government. The act is detriment to the Checks & Balances intended by the Framers of the Constitution to prevent abuse of power & protect the rights of the people preventing its operation & concealment of the Federal crime committed by Vanderburgh County Judge David Kiely pursuant to Title 18, sec. 243- which is the exclusion of jurors on account of race. Congress made it a crime for a public official to exclude anyone from a grand or petit jury on the basis of race & the Supreme Court upheld the STATUTE, approving the determination that such exclusion would violate the express prohibition of the Equal Protection Clause. You have until February 18, 2010 to call a press conference informing the media & public there must be a Congressional Hearing called for the constitutions checks & Balances to take place as it has been petitioned due to abuse of power in the Judicial Branch of Government, including a Federal Crime committed by officials. This petition using the Constitutions Checks & Balances has been Petitioned by Jesha Miller whose rights have been violated & denied government redress for the violations of the 5th & 13th & 14th Amendments that government must be held to the rule of law & cannot deny due process or any of the Constitutions prohibitions which includes a violation of the 13th Amendment. Failure to do so by then, not only denying my rights under color of law, but moreover, preventing the operation of the Constitutions Checks & Balances intended to stop corruption & Department officials must make your arrest immediately after February 18, 2010.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
I certify that the forgoing information stated here is true and correct.
Citizen's signature- Jesha Miller
> Date> February 16, 2010 <
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Legal Notice and Warning
Federal law provides that it is a crime to violate the rights of a citizen under color-of law. You can
be arrested for this crime and you can also be held personally liable for civil damages.
Without the system of checks and balance there would be a constant struggle between the President, Congress and the supreme court. It is natural that each part of government would try to expand their powers. Congress would start making laws that makes it more powerful, the President would use his power on the armed forces to gain influence and the supreme court would cut deals with congress by using its power to judge court cases. You might argue that no respectable politician would try unjustly gain more power, but this is not true; the politicians would easily justify this and since there would be no system in place to stop them they wouldn't be accountable.
One law in the system of checks and balances is the law that allows citizens to challenge any law that they feel is unjust. Once the law that they don't like is passed they can challenge it and bring the law to court. The law is then debated between a lawyer representing the law and the plaintiff. If the court finds that the law is unjust the law is then abolished. This part of checks and balances prevents congress from abusing its power by making unjust laws. This power given to the people is currently being exercised in many states. One law in the system of checks and balances is the law that allows citizens to challenge any law that they feel is unjust. The system of checks and balances is a fundamental part of our government.
By Senator Lugar refusing to take my petition using the Constitutions Checks & Balances prevents its operation so that Judge David Kiely is not held accountable for violation of Title 18 sec. 243 & the U.S. Supreme Court for its abuse of power for denying my Habeas Corpus, which is a power denied government under Article I, Sec. 9.
This denies my rights under Color of Law that are guaranteed by the Bill of Rights violating the 6th Amendment right to a fair trial & the LAW that allows my use of the Constitutions checks & balances to expose abuse of power, restore those rights violated by officials, & hold officials accountable for their actions.
Monday, December 7, 2009 Petition Bipartisanship to obey the Constitutions Checks & Balances
From: Jesha Miller1011 Lincoln Ave. Apt. DEvansville In. 47714812-604-4963yhwhyesha@yahoo.comTo: President Barack ObamaHouse Majority Leader- Steny HoyerHouse Minority Leader- John BoehnerCongressman Brad EllsworthSenate Majority Leader- Sen. Harry ReidSenate Minority Leader- Mitch McConnellSenator- Richard LugarDirector- Raymond A. Mosley- Federal RegisterRe: This is the cooperation between both political parties in both Houses & the President addressing the Checks & Balances due to abuse of power. The Checks & Balances is of sufficient national importance as to preclude normal consideration of partisan advantage written into the constitution to prevent one part of government from abusing its power, which government has refused to address refusing to uphold the integrity of the Constitution of the United States of America. PETITION IS TIME SENSITIVE SO ACT IMMEDIATELY WITHIN 5 DAYS, DECEMBER 11, 2009.PETITION BIPARTISANSHIP TO OBEY THE CONSTITUTIONS CHECKS & BALANCESis on blog at: http://jeshapetofficialsobeycont.blogspot.com/
Claim 7 - Former Congressman Brad Ellsworth was petitioned to take my petition using the Constitutions checks & balances to the floor supported by 600 signatures of citizens in support that the checks & balances should be used because of the Federal crime pursuant to Title 18, sec. 243 but he still refused.
He was given a Violation Warning Denial of Rights under Color of Law & continued concealment of the crime to aid & abet Judge Kiely from justice.
Brad Ellsworth was a part of the Bipartisanship with Senator Lugar & refused to take my petition to the floor again.
Supporting Facts - Previous petition of Bipartisanship affirms he is part of that petititon with Senator Lugar.
Violation Warning Denial of Rights under Color of Law delivered to his Evansville office with signature of employee that received it is submitted as evidence.
Copy of petition with signatures of citizens in support of taking the petition using the checks & balances to the floor so that it is recognized & put into operation is submitted as evidence.
This denies my rights under Color of Law that are guaranteed by the Bill of Rights violating the 6th Amendment right to a fair trial & the LAW that allows my use of the Constitutions checks & balances to expose abuse of power, restore those rights violated by officials, & hold officials accountable for their actions.
18 USC sec. 242 provides that whoever, under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States ...shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
This justifies the Civil Complaint that will not fail because those rights violated are guaranteed by the Bill of Rights & he prevents the operation of the constitutions checks & balances.
Claim VIII. - Indiana Deputy Attorney Betsy Isenberg refuses to enforce Federal Law under Title 18 against Judge David Kiely.
Was petition again to allow withdrawal because Betsy Isenberg was assigned to the case to make sure Greg Zoeller knew & be held accountable for the Indiana Attorney Generals Office violating my rights under Color of Law.
18 USC sec. 242 provides that whoever, under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States ...shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
SUPPORTING FACTS: Filed- June 23 2010 - Indiana Attorney Generals Office Motioned to Indict Judge Kiely. Deputy Attorney Betsy Isenberg fails in her duty to protect the rights, freedoms, & interest of its citizens when petitioned to withdraw representation of Judge David Kiely &
indict & arrest him pursuant to Title 18 § 243. Title 18 has two purposes.
By this unambiguous provision, now contained in 18 U.S.C. § 243, Congress put cases involving exclusions from jury service on grounds of race in a class by themselves. Congress surely had the power to implement the policies of the Fourteenth Amendment in this manner, it chose instead to deter such violations of the Fourteenth Amendment by imposing criminal sanctions.
A closer look at the statute is warranted. From all indications, § 243 was intended to serve two purposes: first, to make explicit what was implicit in the Fourteenth Amendment, that persons cannot be denied the right to serve on juries because of their race; and second, to prevent racial exclusions from juries by providing criminal penalties for persons violating the statutory command. See Ex parte Virginia, 100 U. S. 339 (1880); Neal v. Delaware, 103 U. S. 370, 103 U. S. 386 (1881).
Filed- November 30, 2010 - Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller -
Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller is responsible for the actions of
Attorney Betsy Isenberg who refused to withdraw representation of Judge
David Kiely & indict him when petitioned June 23, 2010. Choosing instead
to represent the criminal acts of Judge David Kiely in violation of Title 18 §
243. Aiding & abetting a criminal from justice. Greg Zoeller is now fully aware & may withdraw representation of Judge David Kiely & also inform the media he is indicting David Kiely or face impeachment. This is on blog at
http://inattgenpet2indictjudgekiely.blogspot.com/.
Given opportunity to withdraw & refusing with full knowledge of the crime committed pursuant to Title 18 he violates my rights under Title 18 § 242.
18 USC sec. 242 provides that whoever, under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States ...shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
This issue involves my 6th Amendment right to a fair trial by an impartial jury
protected by the Bill of Rights. The Sixth Amendment (Amendment VI) to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights which sets forth rights related to criminal prosecutions. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed. Here he denies me the Rule of LAW, requiring criminal charges under Title 18 sec. 243 which was intended to deter officials from violating my right to a fair trial violating the equal protection clause & protecting my right to freedom. Evidence from claim 1 affirms the crime committed by Judge David Kiely.
Claim 9- FBI- Agent Flaherty & then U.S. Attorney Timothy Morrison
were petitioned to enforce Title 18 sec. 243 & 245 but refused to enforce the Rule of Law pursuant Title 18. This is aiding & abetting a criminal from justice.
They also violate my rights under color of law under Title 18, sec. 242.
18 USC sec. 242 provides that whoever, under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States ...shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
SUPPORTING FACTS- The FBI is the lead federal agency for investigating color of law abuses, which includes acts carried out by
government officials operating both within & beyond the limits of their lawful authority. Preventing abuse of this authority, however , is equally necessary to the health of our Nation's DEMOCRACY. That's why
its a federal crime for anyone acting under "color of law" willfully to deprive
or conspire to deprive a person of a right protected by the Constitution or
U.S. Law.
U.S. Attorney Timothy Morrison received Jesha Miller's petition to indict
Judge David Kiely under Title 18 om February 24, 2010. Submitted is his
office stamped for the aforementioned date.
FBI agent Brian Flaherty received Jesha Miller's petition to indict Judge David Kiely January 26, 2010.
They both failed in their duty to enforce the law, but moreover aided & abetted Judge David Kiely from justice. Our constitution guarantees the right to freedom so this harms our Democracy.
Claim 10- The Public Integrity Section overseeing the federal effort to combat corruption through the prosecution of elected officials refused to
enforce the law pursuant to Title 18, sec. 243. This was addressed to
Raymond Hulser.
In denying me the rule of law he violates my rights under color of law.
18 USC sec. 242 provides that whoever, under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States ...shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
When this section specifically made to stop corruption are corrupt & the President ignores the fact that the Buck stops with him to uphold the Integrity of the Constitution this justifies my right to a Civil Complaint against the USA
because all officials have refused to protect my right to freedom by enforcing Title 18, sec. 243 which violates the equal protection clause.
Because this is directly related to their duties it is Political & Judicial corruption throughout all branches of government. This justified my petition
using the Constitutions checks & balances as intended by the Framers of the Constitution to prevent abuse of power & protect the right to freedom.
Because there was corruption in all branches & the media was a stumbling block concealing the corruption the corruption continues & must be addressed now in this Civil Complaint against the USA whose constitution &
Bill of Rights guarantee the right to freedom, justice, equality, & the pursuit of happiness.
These are the same rights "all men are created equal" which were fought for
by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. that are again being denied to a Black man.
It is the history of a nation that enslaved Blacks to care nothing of our right to freedom & justice. Despite having a Mulatto for President, it is the White genes that dominate & conceal corruption rather than bring out the truth so that there is justice. When you refuse to uphold the integrity of the Constitution checks & balances you are a part of the corruption.
SUPPORTING FACTS- The public Integrity Section is a section of the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice charged with combating political corruption at all levels of government through the prosecution of corrupt federal,state, & local elected & appointed officials.
Raymond Hulser was petitioned to prosecute officials for corruption
which was sent with Delivery Confirmation # 0309 1830 0001 0212
4275. The Integrity section failed to enforce the law under Title 18
violating my rights under color of law themselves, aiding & abetting criminals from justice.
Because all Defendants in this Civil Complaint against the U.S. fail to enforce the law under Title 18 & protect my rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, rights government must protect, this suit will be successful because the Bill of Rights assure the rights violated will be made correct.
Claim 11- Threat of being a Political Prisoner by Judge Allen Ferguson of the juvenile Division & Deputy Prosecutor M.F. Keppler.
Violates my unalienable right to freedom.
These officials abuse their power to intimidate & threaten my right to freedom by pretence that I am not paying my child support when the ulterior
motive is to make me a Political Prisoner so that I am unable to secure those rights violated.
If they had no knowledge of me, Jesha Miller, petitioning the checks & balances you could say maybe not, but they are in full knowledge & sent a
contempt of Court when I informed the court I was paying by money order to
my daughter. This is part of my immediate hardship.
Supporting Evidence- Filed - October 23, 2009 I. No Grounds For Contempt. II. No Power To Take Freedom
Part I. illustrates I have not only been paying the 50 dollars, but an xtra 25 dollars for years previously to catch up already for more than
three years. Copy of filing submitted.
Part II. Informs them of the checks & balances I've petitioned due to
corruption in all three Branches of government.
The filing for me to appear February 7th, 2011 is an abuse of power
to make me a political prisoner because they are in full knowledge
that government has not addressed the checks & balances.
E. PREVIOUS LAWSUITS
Have you been or are you now a party to any other lawsuit(s) in state or federal
dealing with the same facts involved in this action? ___X__Yes_____No
If your answer is "Yes." describe each lawsuit. ( If there is more than one lawsuit, describe the additional lawsuits using this same format on a blank sheet which you should label "E.
PREVIOUS LAWSUITS."
a. Parties to previous lawsuit:
Plaitiff(s): Jesha Miller
Defendant(s) Judge David Kiely, Congressman Brad Ellsworth, Katie Couric,
Al Sharpton, Lee Horwich, etc...
b. Name and location of court and docket number - U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Indiana. 3:10-cr- 51 RLY-WGH then reassigned
3:10-cv-051-SEB-WGH
c. Disposition of Lawsuit. ( Dismissed by Judge Sarah Evans Barker citing frivolous. ) ( At issue was the criminal act under Title 18, sec. 243 & the 6th
Amendment Right to a fair trial by an impartial jury. Frivolous means of little importance & unable to prove. The right to a fair trial is an unalienable right that I
cannot be separated from of such importance that it is guaranteed by the 6th
Amendment of the Constitution guaranteeing the right to a fair trail by an impartial jury. Transcripts affirm my race was excluded. )
d. Issues raised: Civil Rights Act of March 1, 1875, not to pursue a course of conduct in the administration of their office which would operate to discriminate
in the selection of jurors on racial grounds. Title 18, sec. 242,243, & 145.
42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. Constitutional Right # 925.
e. Approximate date of filing lawsuit: April 4, 2010
f. Approximate date of disposition: May 13, 2010
"E. PREVIOUS LAWSUITS
The lawsuit was dismissed violating the 7th Amendment right to a trial by jury. Judge Sarah Evans Barker dismissed the complaint on the grounds that it was frivolous when at issue is the right to a fair trial which is guaranteed by the
6th Amendment. Judge Barker violates my rights under color of law by refusing
me the rule of law pursuant to Title 18, sec. 243 which charges Judge David Kiely for violating the Statute. It is for this reason that no agency enforced the law under Title 18 that I bring this Civil Suit against the USA because it is that statute that protects my right to freedom & violates the equal protection clause.
Had she enforced the rule of law & allowed a trail by jury as I am entitled to
I would not have a case against the entire Judicial Branch. When the President of the federal Judges association is corrupt it send a message to the other judges that they can violate a citizens rights under color of law & not be held accountable. A large part of maintaining a Democracy is having official corruption made known through the public & by violating my rights under color of law she can conceal this by not enforcing the law so that the media are not held accountable for violating my Constitutional Right # 925 which enables every citizen at any time to bring the government & any person in authority to the bar of public opinion by any just criticism upon their conduct in the exercise of authority
which the people have conferred upon them. The corruption of the US legal system is well-hidden, by the news services of America's corporate owned media. This stop the operation of the constitutions checks & balances which would expose corruption throughout the Judicial Branch of government. That is the motive for Judge Sarah Barker dismissing my case & not enforcing the rule of law. It would then expose her colleagues of still denying Blacks the right to freedom & justice. THIS IS WHY CASE No. 3:10-cv-051-SEB-WGH was dismissed. To hide corruption in her own Branch of government.
F. REQUEST FOR RELIEF
I REQUEST THE FOLLOWING RELIEF:
Immediate money from the government due to immediate hardship for 2
million dollars because I am to be evicted for not being able to pay the rent
which is only due to government refusing to redress government which would rectify the situation by paying the money which I would already have which is 10 million for the illegal restraint & 40 million in punitive damages
in case No. 04-7377. Copy of relief submitted to justify Hardship. Call the landlord- Gail at 502-245-6651 to affirm she is going to file eviction notice.
The records affirm the violation of the 13th & 14th Amendments by Judge
David Kiely so the conviction needs to be reversed so that all my Constitutional Rights are restored. A total of 80 million dollars is the amount
to rewarded which is an additional 30 million that I would have won in the case that Judge Sarah Evans Barker dismissed against Judge David Kiely,
Former Congressman Brad Ellsworth, Katie Couric, etc.....
This combined with the 50 million in case No. 04-7377 totals to 80 million
dollars.
The rights violated are guaranteed by the Bill of Rights which assures
the Civil Suit will be successful because it assures the outcome to correct
the wrongs & reward what I should have received which totals to 80 million
dollars & reversal of the conviction that was so lawless that it failed to conform to the due process as mandated. Copy of request for relief in case
No. 3:10-cv-051-SEB-WGH is submitted affirming 30 million which would have been won.
__________________________ __Jesha Miller _______
Original signature of attorney (if any) Plaintiffs Original Signature
Date: January 20,2011
DECLARATION UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY
The undersigned declares under penalty of perjury that he is the plaintiff in the above action, that he has read the above complaint and that the information contained in the complaint is true and accurate.
Executed at 304 Federal Building, 101 N.W. MLK Jr. Blvd.
Evansville In. 47708 ( 812-434-6410 ) on January 20, 2011
Plaintiff demands a trial by jury as a 7th Amendment right because at issue in money is more than 20 dollars & the rights violated are guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.
