Tuesday, July 30, 2013
07-30-2013 1st Notice of Intent to Bring A Federal Lawsuit
The last round of Discovery given to me by Prosecutor Merrell on July 24, 2013, was the proof I required to show that crimes were committed against the girls, their mother, the other neighbor and the ACCUSED. At this point the only one I can legally speak for is the ACCUSED. I will take these charges to the Federal Court in the forum of a Title 42 USC Section 1983 Denial of Rights Under Color of Law lawsuit for violations of the 4th and 6th Amendment Rights of the ACCUSED. This is the 1st Notice on the parties I can show damaged the ACCUSED in their criminal actions under color of law.
07-30-2013 Finally! I know the Cause and Nature of the Charges
For three years I have stated that I did not know the Cause and Nature of the charges against the ACCUSED, RUSSELL L DOVE. For three years I have demanded that Discovery be provided and that the Criminal Information be made clear that I might know the Cause and Nature of the charges against the ACCUSED.
The Limited Discovery provided to me by Prosecutor Merrell on behalf of the ACCUSED on February 16, 2012, had a lot of repeated information in it, but really nothing on making clear the Cause and Nature of the charges.
Finally on July 24, 2013, Prosecutor Merrell handed me a DVD and on that DVD I discovered the seeds that created the current cause against the ACCUSED, the Cause and Nature of the charges. The documents I speak of were created in April, May and June of 2010, why did it take Prosecutor Merrell three years to give them to the ACCUSED?
I still don't understand the charges against the ACCUSED, I've never been good at understanding lies beyond those lies that I wanted to hear and then I found a way. I wonder if Judge Orr understands the charges against the ACCUSED? Better yet; I wonder if Prosecutor Merrell understands them?
Up until now all I have had is hearsay testimony of what went down behind the scenes to bring me before the Missouri 38th Judiciary, nothing I could sink my teeth into and nothing I could fight but shadows. This is the reason that my motions have been vague. Now within the fullness of the current Discovery I have; I can show the crimes committed against the girls, their mother, the other neighbor and myself, agent for the ACCUSED.
Very Interesting!!!!!!!!!!!!
P.S. Really? 3 years to get Discovery and the Criminal Information is still in violation of the RSMo requirements and rulings of the Higher Courts. It looks an awful lot like Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law to me.
The Limited Discovery provided to me by Prosecutor Merrell on behalf of the ACCUSED on February 16, 2012, had a lot of repeated information in it, but really nothing on making clear the Cause and Nature of the charges.
Finally on July 24, 2013, Prosecutor Merrell handed me a DVD and on that DVD I discovered the seeds that created the current cause against the ACCUSED, the Cause and Nature of the charges. The documents I speak of were created in April, May and June of 2010, why did it take Prosecutor Merrell three years to give them to the ACCUSED?
I still don't understand the charges against the ACCUSED, I've never been good at understanding lies beyond those lies that I wanted to hear and then I found a way. I wonder if Judge Orr understands the charges against the ACCUSED? Better yet; I wonder if Prosecutor Merrell understands them?
Up until now all I have had is hearsay testimony of what went down behind the scenes to bring me before the Missouri 38th Judiciary, nothing I could sink my teeth into and nothing I could fight but shadows. This is the reason that my motions have been vague. Now within the fullness of the current Discovery I have; I can show the crimes committed against the girls, their mother, the other neighbor and myself, agent for the ACCUSED.
Very Interesting!!!!!!!!!!!!
P.S. Really? 3 years to get Discovery and the Criminal Information is still in violation of the RSMo requirements and rulings of the Higher Courts. It looks an awful lot like Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law to me.
Tuesday, July 23, 2013
07-23-2013 Let Us Be Lawful At A Minimum
<!--[if gte mso 9]>
sovereign7
Normal
sovereign7
2
7
2013-07-24T04:12:00Z
2013-07-24T05:01:00Z
2013-07-24T05:01:00Z
5
1693
9652
80
22
11323
14.00
<![endif]
-->
In the Missouri 38th Judicial
Circuit Court, Taney County, Case No. 10AF-CR01742-01, before Judge Orr to be
read into the record July 24, 2013.
I need to clear up a
few things here for the Record:
I am russ dove and have been living as russ dove for 30 years.
I am a Genesis One man;
a blood of the Spirit, blood of the flesh man on the land and draw my authority
to stand on the land from the Word of God:
Gen 1:27 So
God created man in his own image, in the image of God
Gal 2:20 I
am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in
me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son
of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
Joh_1:12 But
as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God,
I am a sovereign
Black’s Law Dictionary 4th
Edition 1951 page 1568: defines a SOVEREIGN in part as: A person, or other ruler with limited
power.
Title 42
U.S.C. Sec. 1983, Wood v. Breier, 54 F.R.D. 7, 10-11 (E.D. Wis. 1972); and
Frankenhauser v. Rizzo, 59 F.R.D. 339 (E.D. Pa. 1973) "Each
citizen acts as a private attorney general who 'takes on the mantel of
sovereign."
Afroyim
v. Rusk, 387 U.S. 253 (1967). “In the
United States the People are sovereign and the government cannot sever
its relationship to the People by taking away their citizenship.”
I am an Agent of non-compliance/non-consent with
prejudice, and under duress appearing from the land in a special appearance to
ascertain the cause against the ACCUSED, RUSSELL L DOVE and seek a lawful resolution
founded in justice:
Black’s Law Dictionary 2nd Edition 1910 page 703:
defines LAWFUL as,
Legal; warranted or authorized by the law; having the qualifications
prescribed by law; not contrary to nor forbidden by the law.
Black’s Law Dictionary 2nd
Edition 1910 page 1027: defines RESOLUTION as, The determination or
decision, in regard to its opinion or intention, In practice. The judgement of a court. 5 Mod. 438; 10 Mod. 200.
Black’s Law Dictionary 2nd Edition 1910 page 682:
defines JUSTICE as. v. In old English practice, To do justice; to see justice
done; to summon one to do justice. JUSTICE, n. In jurisprudence. The constant and
perpetual disposition to render every man his due.
I
am not a corporation
Black’s Law Dictionary 4th
Edition 1951 page 409: defines CORPORATION as. An artificial person or legal entity created by or under
the authority of the laws of a state or nation, composed, in some rare
instances, of a single person . . .
I am not the party of accommodation
This is not a defense, it is simply who I am
and as a sovereign I have certain unalienable rights; including the right to
demand that the laws be followed in this matter.
RUSSELL L DOVE, the
ACCUSED, is the name given to the Corporate Fiction by way of the system and
proceeds Sui Juris, un-represented and not Pro Se, re-presenting itself.
That my demands, for
cause against the ACCUESED be heard in an Article III; Constitutional Court,
were ignored even though the ACCUSED does have a contract with you Judge Orr, where the ACCUSED accepts your Sworn Oath to
the people of Taney County, Missouri, to up hold the Supreme Law of the Land,
the Constitution and the Constitution of the Great Sovereign State of Missouri;
the ACCUSED has the same contract with the Taney County Prosecutor, Sheriff and
Court Clerk, there was a reasonable lawful expectation that you would do your
best to meet that demand. I let myself believe that you might attempt to comply
with my demands; I found out just how wrong I was on June 26, 2013.
I’m still reeling
from the fact that this court feels it has the authority to overrule rulings of
a higher court. You tell me that you will hold me to the same requirements of a
lawyer/attorney, even though the higher courts have ruled otherwise. Prosecutor
Merrell tells you that he wants the full rights that the law allows him to
prosecute the ACCUSED. So, as agent for the ACCUSED, I demand that you both
follow the law, the rules and procedures that govern your respective positions
of authority and that you provide agent for the ACCUSED the time to introduce
his arguments and the laws that support those arguments into the Record. To do
anything less would be to darken the purity this court is meant to represent.
The
Right to be Heard is secured in Rule 2:
Rules Governing the Missouri BAR and the Judiciary
There
is no provision in law for local customs
I therefore demand that at a minimum you abide by the very
same statutes you use to charge the ACCUSED and that you operate within the
established Rules and Procedures that govern your positions of power given to
you by We the People.
In the Missouri
Constitution, Article II § 14 ~ "That the courts of justice
shall be open to every person, and certain remedy afforded for every injury,
property or character, and that right and justice shall be administered without
sale, denial or delay."
In Miller v. U.S. 230 F 486 at 489 (5th Cir. 1956) "The claim and exercise of
a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime."
Owens v. City of Independence, 100 S.Ct 1398
(1980) "The
innocent individual who is harmed by an abuse of governmental authority is
assured that he will be compensated for his injury."
I want to remind Prosecutor
Merrell of has lawful duties and responsibilities to the ACCUSED
RULE 4-3.8: SPECIAL RESPONSIBILITIES
OF A PROSECUTOR
The prosecutor in a
criminal case shall:
(a) refrain
from prosecuting a charge that the prosecutor knows is not supported by
probable cause;
[1] A prosecutor has the
responsibility of a minister of justice and not simply that of an advocate.
This responsibility carries with it specific obligations to see that the
defendant is accorded procedural justice and that guilt is decided upon the
basis of sufficient evidence. Applicable law may require other measures by the
prosecutor and knowing disregard of those obligations or a systematic abuse of
prosecutorial discretion could constitute a violation of Missouri Supreme Court
Rule 4-8.4.
I want to remind you, Judge Orr of your lawful duties and
responsibilities to the ACCUSED and his agent:
Rule
2: Rules Governing the Missouri BAR and the Judiciary Code of Judicial Conduct
Rule 2.02 (h & p) of
the Judicial Code of Conduct defines the words “law” and “shall” as follows:
"Law" denotes court rules as well as
applicable constitutional provisions, statutes, ordinances and decisional and
other law.
"Shall" or "shall not" intends to
impose binding obligations the violation of which can result in disciplinary
action.
2.03. Canon 2. A Judge Shall
Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in All of the Judge's
Activities
A.
A judge shall respect and comply with the law and shall act at
all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and
impartiality of the judiciary.
2.03. Canon 3. A Judge Shall
Perform the Duties of Judicial Office Impartially and Diligently
(2)
A judge shall be faithful to the law and maintain professional
competence in it. A judge shall not be swayed by partisan interests, public
clamor or fear of criticism.
(4)
A judge shall be patient, dignified and courteous to litigants, jurors,
witnesses, lawyers and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity
and shall require similar conduct of lawyers and of staff, court
officials and others subject to the judge's direction and control.
(5)
A judge shall perform judicial duties without bias or prejudice. A
judge, in the performance of judicial duties, shall not by words
or conduct manifest bias or prejudice, including but not limited to bias or
prejudice based upon race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, national origin,
disability or age, and shall not permit staff, court officials
and others subject to the judge's direction and control to do so.
(8) A judge shall dispose of all
judicial matters promptly, efficiently and fairly.
The Sheriff is the
final Constitutional Authority and in an Executive Branch position not bound by
or to the Judicial System
Bailiffs are Sheriff’s
Deputies and all have sworn to uphold the Supreme Law of the Land, the Constitution
and the Missouri State Constitution and abide by the laws.
The charges against
the accused are without merit
Given that there is no
physical evidence only circumstantial evidence and the two(2)
eye witness in two(2) separate accounts on the record collaborate the accused’s
defense there is no lawful reason to continue this matter. All other witnesses
for the state should be excluded as hearsay and or improper bolstering.
Constitutional
violations have occurred
No Due Process
No True Probable Cause
The defense
stipulates that SK and AD were restrained with rope once in early February 2009
as a disciplinary act.
The legal question
here is; was a crime committed and did the ACCUSED violate the statues as
charged?
The statutes must be applied as written and have no need of
interruption.
State v. Rowe, 63 S.W.3d
647, 649 (Mo. banc 2002). “Courts apply certain guidelines to interpretation, sometimes called
rules or canons of statutory construction, when the meaning is unclear or there
is more than one possible interpretation.”
Id. (citing State ex rel. Mo.
Pac. R.R. v. Koehr, 853 S.W.2d 925, 926 (Mo. banc 1993)). When the wording of the statutes is clear a different standard applies.
“When the words are clear, however, there is nothing to construe beyond
applying the plain meaning of the law.”
Requirements of a crime
Actus
Reus (Guilty Action), Mens Rea (Guilty Mind), Concurrence, Harmful Result and
Causation
It is incumbent upon Prosecutor Merrell to prove all four
elements of the crimes charged beyond a reasonable doubt.
State v. Barnes, 245 S.W.3d
885, 889 (Mo.App. E.D.2008). “The State has the burden to prove each and
every element of a criminal case.“
Unless New Discovery
produces some physical evidence the trial you have planned can be no more than
a he said they said affair and in that case the character of the witnesses
involved is the only thing that can be judged. That fact alone makes that any
conviction handed down would fall short of the “beyond a reasonable doubt” required
by law in a criminal court
This is a criminal matter that is not to be
judged on emotion based on what you think you see or you think might have
happened it is about the facts and what the facts say did happen.
-->
-->
In the Missouri 38th Judicial
Circuit Court, Taney County, Case No. 10AF-CR01742-01, before Judge Orr to be
read into the record July 24, 2013.
I need to clear up a
few things here for the Record:
I am russ dove and have been living as russ dove for 30 years.
I am a Genesis One man;
a blood of the Spirit, blood of the flesh man on the land and draw my authority
to stand on the land from the Word of God:
Gen 1:27 So
God created man in his own image, in the image of God
Gal 2:20 I
am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in
me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son
of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
Joh_1:12 But
as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God,
I am a sovereign
Black’s Law Dictionary 4th
Edition 1951 page 1568: defines a SOVEREIGN in part as: A person, or other ruler with limited
power.
Title 42
U.S.C. Sec. 1983, Wood v. Breier, 54 F.R.D. 7, 10-11 (E.D. Wis. 1972); and
Frankenhauser v. Rizzo, 59 F.R.D. 339 (E.D. Pa. 1973) "Each
citizen acts as a private attorney general who 'takes on the mantel of
sovereign."
Afroyim
v. Rusk, 387 U.S. 253 (1967). “In the
United States the People are sovereign and the government cannot sever
its relationship to the People by taking away their citizenship.”
I am an Agent of non-compliance/non-consent with
prejudice, and under duress appearing from the land in a special appearance to
ascertain the cause against the ACCUSED, RUSSELL L DOVE and seek a lawful resolution
founded in justice:
Black’s Law Dictionary 2nd Edition 1910 page 703:
defines LAWFUL as,
Legal; warranted or authorized by the law; having the qualifications
prescribed by law; not contrary to nor forbidden by the law.
Black’s Law Dictionary 2nd
Edition 1910 page 1027: defines RESOLUTION as, The determination or
decision, in regard to its opinion or intention, In practice. The judgement of a court. 5 Mod. 438; 10 Mod. 200.
Black’s Law Dictionary 2nd Edition 1910 page 682:
defines JUSTICE as. v. In old English practice, To do justice; to see justice
done; to summon one to do justice. JUSTICE, n. In jurisprudence. The constant and
perpetual disposition to render every man his due.
I
am not a corporation
Black’s Law Dictionary 4th
Edition 1951 page 409: defines CORPORATION as. An artificial person or legal entity created by or under
the authority of the laws of a state or nation, composed, in some rare
instances, of a single person . . .
I am not the party of accommodation
This is not a defense, it is simply who I am
and as a sovereign I have certain unalienable rights; including the right to
demand that the laws be followed in this matter.
RUSSELL L DOVE, the
ACCUSED, is the name given to the Corporate Fiction by way of the system and
proceeds Sui Juris, un-represented and not Pro Se, re-presenting itself.
That my demands, for
cause against the ACCUESED be heard in an Article III; Constitutional Court,
were ignored even though the ACCUSED does have a contract with you Judge Orr, where the ACCUSED accepts your Sworn Oath to
the people of Taney County, Missouri, to up hold the Supreme Law of the Land,
the Constitution and the Constitution of the Great Sovereign State of Missouri;
the ACCUSED has the same contract with the Taney County Prosecutor, Sheriff and
Court Clerk, there was a reasonable lawful expectation that you would do your
best to meet that demand. I let myself believe that you might attempt to comply
with my demands; I found out just how wrong I was on June 26, 2013.
I’m still reeling
from the fact that this court feels it has the authority to overrule rulings of
a higher court. You tell me that you will hold me to the same requirements of a
lawyer/attorney, even though the higher courts have ruled otherwise. Prosecutor
Merrell tells you that he wants the full rights that the law allows him to
prosecute the ACCUSED. So, as agent for the ACCUSED, I demand that you both
follow the law, the rules and procedures that govern your respective positions
of authority and that you provide agent for the ACCUSED the time to introduce
his arguments and the laws that support those arguments into the Record. To do
anything less would be to darken the purity this court is meant to represent.
The
Right to be Heard is secured in Rule 2:
Rules Governing the Missouri BAR and the Judiciary
Code of Judicial Conduct : 2.03. Canon 3.
(7) A judge shall accord to every person who has a legal interest in a proceeding, or that person's lawyer, the right to be heard according to law.
There
is no provision in law for local customs
I therefore demand that at a minimum you abide by the very
same statutes you use to charge the ACCUSED and that you operate within the
established Rules and Procedures that govern your positions of power given to
you by We the People.
In the Missouri
Constitution, Article II § 14 ~ "That the courts of justice
shall be open to every person, and certain remedy afforded for every injury,
property or character, and that right and justice shall be administered without
sale, denial or delay."
In Miller v. U.S. 230 F 486 at 489 (5th Cir. 1956) "The claim and exercise of
a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime."
Owens v. City of Independence, 100 S.Ct 1398
(1980) "The
innocent individual who is harmed by an abuse of governmental authority is
assured that he will be compensated for his injury."
I want to remind Prosecutor
Merrell of has lawful duties and responsibilities to the ACCUSED
RULE 4-3.8: SPECIAL RESPONSIBILITIES
OF A PROSECUTOR
The prosecutor in a
criminal case shall:
(a) refrain
from prosecuting a charge that the prosecutor knows is not supported by
probable cause;
[1] A prosecutor has the
responsibility of a minister of justice and not simply that of an advocate.
This responsibility carries with it specific obligations to see that the
defendant is accorded procedural justice and that guilt is decided upon the
basis of sufficient evidence. Applicable law may require other measures by the
prosecutor and knowing disregard of those obligations or a systematic abuse of
prosecutorial discretion could constitute a violation of Missouri Supreme Court
Rule 4-8.4.
McCurdy v Montgomery County, Ohio, 240 F.3d 512 (6th Cir. 2001). “Government officials in general, and police officers in particular, may not exercise their authority for personal motives, particularly in response to real or perceived slights to their dignity. Surely, anyone who takes an oath of office knows - or should know - that much."
Levine v. United States, 362 U.S. 610, 80 S. Ct. 1038 (1960) “The Supreme Court has ruled and has reaffirmed the principle that “justice must satisfy the appearance of justice.”
Howlett v. Rose, 496 U.S. 356 (1990). “Federal law & Supreme Court cases apply to state court cases.”
I want to remind you, Judge Orr of your lawful duties and
responsibilities to the ACCUSED and his agent:
Rule
2: Rules Governing the Missouri BAR and the Judiciary Code of Judicial Conduct
Rule 2.02 (h & p) of
the Judicial Code of Conduct defines the words “law” and “shall” as follows:
"Law" denotes court rules as well as
applicable constitutional provisions, statutes, ordinances and decisional and
other law.
"Shall" or "shall not" intends to
impose binding obligations the violation of which can result in disciplinary
action.
2.03. Canon 2. A Judge Shall
Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in All of the Judge's
Activities
A.
A judge shall respect and comply with the law and shall act at
all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and
impartiality of the judiciary.
2.03. Canon 3. A Judge Shall
Perform the Duties of Judicial Office Impartially and Diligently
(2)
A judge shall be faithful to the law and maintain professional
competence in it. A judge shall not be swayed by partisan interests, public
clamor or fear of criticism.
(4)
A judge shall be patient, dignified and courteous to litigants, jurors,
witnesses, lawyers and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity
and shall require similar conduct of lawyers and of staff, court
officials and others subject to the judge's direction and control.
(5)
A judge shall perform judicial duties without bias or prejudice. A
judge, in the performance of judicial duties, shall not by words
or conduct manifest bias or prejudice, including but not limited to bias or
prejudice based upon race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, national origin,
disability or age, and shall not permit staff, court officials
and others subject to the judge's direction and control to do so.
(8) A judge shall dispose of all
judicial matters promptly, efficiently and fairly.
The Sheriff is the
final Constitutional Authority and in an Executive Branch position not bound by
or to the Judicial System
Bailiffs are Sheriff’s
Deputies and all have sworn to uphold the Supreme Law of the Land, the Constitution
and the Missouri State Constitution and abide by the laws.
The charges against
the accused are without merit
Given that there is no
physical evidence only circumstantial evidence and the two(2)
eye witness in two(2) separate accounts on the record collaborate the accused’s
defense there is no lawful reason to continue this matter. All other witnesses
for the state should be excluded as hearsay and or improper bolstering.
Constitutional
violations have occurred
No Due Process
No True Probable Cause
Jurisdiction has been challenged
"Jurisdiction, once challenged, cannot be assumed and must be decided." Maine v. Thiboutot, 100 S. Ct. 250
The defense
stipulates that SK and AD were restrained with rope once in early February 2009
as a disciplinary act.
The legal question
here is; was a crime committed and did the ACCUSED violate the statues as
charged?
The statutes must be applied as written and have no need of
interruption.
State v. Rowe, 63 S.W.3d
647, 649 (Mo. banc 2002). “Courts apply certain guidelines to interpretation, sometimes called
rules or canons of statutory construction, when the meaning is unclear or there
is more than one possible interpretation.”
Id. (citing State ex rel. Mo.
Pac. R.R. v. Koehr, 853 S.W.2d 925, 926 (Mo. banc 1993)). When the wording of the statutes is clear a different standard applies.
“When the words are clear, however, there is nothing to construe beyond
applying the plain meaning of the law.”
Requirements of a crime
Actus
Reus (Guilty Action), Mens Rea (Guilty Mind), Concurrence, Harmful Result and
Causation
It is incumbent upon Prosecutor Merrell to prove all four
elements of the crimes charged beyond a reasonable doubt.
State v. Barnes, 245 S.W.3d
885, 889 (Mo.App. E.D.2008). “The State has the burden to prove each and
every element of a criminal case.“
Unless New Discovery
produces some physical evidence the trial you have planned can be no more than
a he said they said affair and in that case the character of the witnesses
involved is the only thing that can be judged. That fact alone makes that any
conviction handed down would fall short of the “beyond a reasonable doubt” required
by law in a criminal court
This is a criminal matter that is not to be
judged on emotion based on what you think you see or you think might have
happened it is about the facts and what the facts say did happen.
Saturday, July 20, 2013
07-19-2013 Let's See If I Can Simplify The Issues Here
If the Missouri 38th Judiciary Circuit refuses to abide by their own laws then there is no remedy for our grievances within the system. Based on 30 years of activism.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)