Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Case Reference:
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Civil Action No.15-1917
Opening note:
It is important to note that in no way is this specifically a criticism of the individuals
named in this suit- largely, in my opinion the men and women do their best to make sure
there is as much justice as they can. in a system, we do our best, working with those
around us, and shiny new parts get tarnished by soot and poor function of a system long
ago in need of an audit and update. The greatest criticism, is one of human behavior;
there are law enforcement, lawyers, judges, who perpetuate the worst of behaviors, that
go on, unchallenged despite evidence that would trigger jail sentences or even death
penalties in any other profession, but, people are not prone to outing their own, whistle
blowing is usually frowned upon.
Introduction:
This document calls for a full Rebranding of America, legally, the formal re-swearing of
the oaths and the principles to which this country was founded, and the elevation of the
execution of the law to scientific precision, by reigniting the flame of national, legal
debate, and re-engaging the consent of the governed, expired long before any still living,
culminating, in a new Constitutional Convention, and a government better suited to the
future of our nation using means already provided to us by the Founding Fathers.
Scope:
The scope of this case is expanded twice. First from the individual to the national, as the
problem to be properly understood, and fixed, must be dealt with as part of a systemic,
national issue- similar to how doctors rarely treat individual bumps of chicken pox.
Second, from use of force by law officers to a greater malady, the gap between defacto
and dejure law, as a common thread running through out our systems of government.
Standing invoked:
As noted in the PA case, as a person who has been attacked by police officers without
cause, I am a member of a class of people who have been adversely affected by the
failure to address a serious concern with how many police officers in this country behave.
I would note that 1st amendment, Congress shall make no laws prohibiting the right to
petition for redress of grievances, suggests that standing should be applied liberally at
best and at worst, any notion of rejection of a clear Constitutional violation by the
government, could be construed as one of the Declaration's legitimate reasons for
revolution, In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for
Redress in the most humble terms, our repeated Petitions have been
answered only by repeated injury.
5. Further, as prosecution of police officers requires the buy in from co-workers (other
police and prosecutors), it is unlikely that there would ever be a reasonable or fair
proceeding with regards to police. Thus is in need of a change of venue, and likely a
permanent community review board because nearly any one involved in a legal system at
the city or state level is going to have a conflict of interest, and indeed, that is seen in the
prosecution rates of police, nearly non-existent, despite the relative eruption of such cases
in our mass media. In fact, even with a prosecutor outside the direct sphere of the officer,
professional mindset, or cultural mindset is likely to still be a significant factor.
The more radical part of the legal theory put forward, is that the ratification of
Constitution's (legality) is in stare decisis or based on the precedent set by Declaration's
ratification legality, and that the official definition, scope, and use of government as it
relates to individuals in the United States is given in that documentation, and is always, a
valid petition for redress of grievances as per the 1st Amendment.
There is little doubt in the historical record; the precedent for the Constitutions Supreme
legality comes from the ratification methodology used with the Declaration. The divorce
from one set of laws, the definition of what government is and should be, and the creation
of said government can be defined as the most legal of acts. Further, the treatise duly
voted upon by every district in a new country, and the reasons, paid for with the blood of
the citizenry, for said change in government and founding of a new one, and signed by
several of our early presidents, and the official designated date of a new country can
hardly be said to have no legal weight.
It was referenced by Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War, and ironically enough in the
secession letters of the Southern states, though blatantly failing the test of legitimate
governments duty to protect the liberty of people. According to a Constitutional scholar
and current President of the United States, Barack Obama "The Declaration is the lens
through which the Constitution should be viewed".
In this particular case; it is useful, because if the core of responsibility of government is
to protect 1 life 2 liberty and 3 the pursuit of happiness, being the largest jailer in human
history is a problem, having the largest death by police rate in the civilized world is cause
for a rapid and immediate change, and the focus on ensuring the pursuit of happiness for
the individual, may have a startling effect on the current crisis of shootings, and mental
health in this country.
A republic will be stronger if the constituents hold a strong image of the law in their
collective understanding, supplemented by a stronger image by those who enforce it
(Cicero).
The general principles around the Declaration can be more simply and easily explained
and taught than the relative specifics of the Constitution, and out of alignment outcomes
are more glaring when viewed from a Declarational framework.
Restitution sought:
Is that the responsibility for Constitutional conduct be proactive, creating a framework,
training, and data collection methodologies for the expectation of federal audits of
practices, defining, standardizing and broadening conflict of interest standards for police,
5
prosecution, prison, and the courts. Review of legal practices; courtroom technologies,
wait times, and processes, also kept, transparently as part of a national database, and an
experiment begun with the states to establish new court room norms for speedy trials.
Also as the adaptation of a framework that is lighter and simpler for both enforcement
agents and citizens to understand, the basics, the Declaration of Independence, which
contains the official definition of government in US code, as well as it's core functions
with regards to the rights of the individual, to be trained and oath sworn at any level of
employment or engagement in government activities, with the urgency being with law
enforcement.
In addition, as poverty is a clear factor, rarely argued, in crime rates, a more focused
attempt to reduce crime by poverty elimination requires a systemic review of all poverty
programs, the elimination of ineffective ones, and promotion of those that work well.
Further, the larger gap between de facto and de jure law needs to be addressed in such a
manner as is not currently proscribed in our frame works.
Particularly right to a speedy trial, (people waiting 2+ years for non violent
offenses?)and the 4th amendment - civil forfeiture seems to be a clear violation this, and
the mass incarceration for non violent crimes while the financial felonies of the past 10
years have been formally waived, creating 14th amendment conflicts. If innocence until
proven guilty is a US legal principles how can so many people be incarcerated pre-trial,
dependent on financial status to obtain release (debtors prison?)
While rights to life and liberty have been specifically addressed though poorly enforced
by later documents like the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and case law, the pursuit
of happiness has never been formally explored or examined by government; and it is
likely that a happier per capita populace would not lead the world in mass shootings.
Is it strictly legally necessary to address these case by case?
According to the decision to found this country, the answer was clear; NO. Their
methodology was to abolish the government that disobeyed, flagrantly it's own rules and
create a mostly new one. We are at another such time, and while the form of the
government has taken on is one which is a brilliant adaptation of regional governing
principles, the shortcomings cannot be ignored behind a blatantly unconstitutional
doctrine of sovereign immunity.
We can and must take actions addressed to the heart of the issue- which is the de facto, de
jure gap that has expanded until threats to domestic tranquility become regular. the failure
to have expressly written frameworks for what acceptable actions are or are not
according to guidelines, i.e. how many days is a speedy trial what is cruel and unusual
punishment (waterboarding, etc.)
While it is understood that this court cannot provide all of the answers sought in this case,
it is clear that these deficiencies in the current de facto set up threatens the bedrock of
Union to slow decay, and worse, open to facist dictatorship- while there is no single
definition of facism, agents of the state being able to kill at will is a component of all of
them. The failure to understand fully these princples has Presidential candidates running
on promises to torture, and to discriminate based upon religion, effectively campaigning
on grounds for impeachment.
It would serve the American people and its legal system to recognize formally the
Declaration, the Constitution, and the US Code as successively more detailed from
principles to ruling frameworks, simplifying the overall code, and making it easier to
address and prevent further unhealthy dissonant gaps between de jure and defacto law.
Likely, it would be best also to re-engage the consent of the governed, as no one alive
consented to this government, and that can only be done through Constitutional
Convention.
This petition is made with the sincerest attempt to restore full faith in police officers, the
legal system, government agencies of the United States of America, and re establish
Justice and a more perfect Union.
_________________________
________________
Darrell Prince
3.14.16
Thecallforunity.org