-
- Publish
only precedents favoring government
agents
- Crooked
U.S.courts stuff precedents favoring citizens down the
toilet
-
|
We have entered
an era of American history where government
agents have been granted absolute immunity
from prosecution--regardless of how
unconstitutional or illegal their
actions.
|
- Guest
editorial by Don Harkins, Idaho
Observer
- Please feel free to access the following court
cases.
-
- Then test the concept of government immunity
from prosecution by attempting to hold government
agents accountable, individually or in their official
capacity, for their actions in a court of law.
-
- You will find that no matter how unconscionable
the actions of government agents in their impassioned
attempts to prosecute innocent people for imagined
crimes, you cannot successfully prosecute state or
federal agents.
-
- 1. Prosecutor may violate civil rights in
initiating prosecution and presenting cause. U.S.
Supreme Court, Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409,
(1976).
-
- 2. Immunity extends to all activities closely
associated with litigation or potential litigation.
Second Circuit Federal Court of Appeals, Davis v.
Grusemeyer, 996 F.2d617 (1993)
-
- 3. Prosecutor may knowingly use false testimony
and suppress evidence. U.S. Supreme Court, Imbler v.
Pachtman, U.S. 409 (1976)
-
- 4. Prosecutor may file charges without any
investigation. Eighth Circuit Federal Court of
Appeals., Myers v. Morris, 810 F.2d 1337
(1987)
-
- 5. Prosecutor may file charges outside of his
jurisdiction. Eighth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals,
Henzel v. Gertatica, 608 F. 2d 654 (1979)
-
- 6. Prosecutor may knowingly offer perjured
testimony. Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals,
Jones v. Shankland, 800 F.2d 1310 (1987)
-
- 7. Prosecutor may suppress exculpatory
evidence. Fifth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals,
Henzel V. Gertatica, 608 F.2d 654 (1979)
-
- 8. Prosecutors are immune from lawsuit for
conspiring with judges to determine the outcome of
judicial proceedings. Ninth Circuit Federal Court of
Appeals, Ashelman v. Pope, 793 F.2d 1072
(1986)
-
- 9. Prosecutor may knowingly file charges
against innocent persons for a crime that never
occurred. Tenth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals,
Norton v. Liddell, 620 F.2d 1375 (1980)
-
- The nine cases cited are only the beginning.
This year there are thousands of cases from across the
country that have decided or ignored in favor of
government and/or its agents.
-
- The cases cited were published and have created
what is known in the legal realm as precedent. The
unfairness of the situation has been exacerbated by
unpublished decisions.
-
- The justice-undermining implications of
unpublished decisions were featured in an article by
Washington, D.C., attorney John g. Kester and was
published in a December 1995 edition of The Wall
Street Journal. 'One law clerk observed that many
government agencies, whenever they win an unpublished
case, routinely ask to have it published and the court
usually complies., but if they lose, down the memory
hole it goes," kester wrote.
-
- In other words, if a citizen happens to win a
case against a government agency, a government
employee or an elected official, the decision is
likely to be "unpublished." An unpublished decision
may be a win for the citizen in the specific case, but
cannot be cited as precedent in later court
proceedings--even if applicable.
-
- Kester wrote"...It is a momentous innovation,
to say that if you find a precedent, you still can't
cite it or that it will be ignored."
-
- The U.S. legal system, which has evolved from
English common law, has been writing and publishing
court decisions since the very beginning. Legal
precedent is the cornerstone of American
jurisprudence.
-
- Over the course of time, perpetual litigants
like the federal government have managed to stack the
legal libraries of this country with published
decisions which support the positions of government
officials while rulings which are contrary to
government interests go unpublished.
-
- The result is a legal system that has been
handicapped so heavily in favor of government
interests that people who are foolish enough to
challenge the authority of the government have no
chance to win in court.
-
- Our republican form of government that was
designed to be of, by and for the people cannot
survive if the judicial branch continues to allow
government agencies, through the activities of their
agents, to stack the law libraries with legal
precedents that provide themselves absolute
immunity.
-
|