NO.
In the Supreme Court of The United States of America
The People and their states of The United States of America
Demandants
Against
- James Bonini;
- Thomas M. Ross;
- Sharon L. Ovington;
- Michael R. Merz;
- James A. Higgins;
- Danny J. Boggs;
- Thomas B. Russell;
- Edward H. Johnstone;
- W. D. King; other upon receiving list from circuit executive of 6th circuit
- Present respondents
PEOPLES' STATEMENT OF NO NEED FOR FORMS
The People On Demand for Certiorari and answers To USDC in southern Ohio
Demand for certiorari and answers
Maurice Edward, Brahier Peoples' Counsel
xxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxx, Ohio
(937) xxxxxxxxx
Questions presented for Review
First set of questions
The People defined within clauses in the state and national constitutional contracts: that they remained in absolute control of certain issues and reserved many undefined and undefinable rights and authority beyond that. Which would reasonably include the creation of Special Grand Jury(ies) to receive and review materials concerning corruption of and/or organized criminal activities within the government. This would automatically apply if the People or an individual had contacted those of government, whose responsibilities and duties as defined by the contracts or under that authority, required their action, and all had apparently failed to proceed as required.
- If it appeared to the People that this failure or refusal by those responsible, therefore required their intervention, or the use of their power which they had rarely used, though always retained; would the refusal of James Bonini to allow them to use this retained power be a violation of their property rights, as the courts have stated the rights of the People are?
- Alternatively, of any other right and/or their authority?
- Would the refusal of James Bonini to file their lawful documents, materials, and other, be a deliberate refusal by him to follow the rules which were defined for him by this court, which knows it has no right or authority to remove the People's law or their authority or otherwise interfere therewith?
- Would the refusal be in obstruction of justice?
- Would that be an obstruction or destruction of the People's rights?
- Would the attempts by lesser courts to refuse to review the People's complaints concerning this activity be a violation of their rights to have this addressed?
- Would this also be an obstruction of justice?
- Would the apparent facts (when allowed review), that appear to indicate the courts and attorneys were apparently covering-up this unlawful activity by dismissals, or fraudulent renderings and/or judgments; indicate that the lesser courts were failing to provide their functions and duties to the People of this nation in active conspiracy and or complicity?
- Would that indicate that the judicial system, in general, has determined it will work to undermine this nation and the People therein, in their rights under constitutional contract, in disregard and disrespect of the fact that the constitutional contract is the only thing that gives them authority to exist in the first place?
- Would these activities then constitute criminal activity as defined by the people's law, and in fact, the statutes, codes, and other of the states and United States?
- Alternatively, is it the court's impression that the People have now surrendered all authority and rights in this nation, and must submit to the will of government as subjects and enslaved citizens?
--------
AS these additional questions are, such that it appears useful to have them answered before the People's Special Grand Jury(ies) are erected. The shear arrogance, self-indulgence, self-importance, self-inflated, and self-centered attitudes displayed by those in government, requires review by the People and the correction thereof.
Second set of questions
The People submitted seven (7) briefs/memorandums (including on cdrom, which may already be within this court, and apparently have been passed around the government for a number of months) directing and extending materials for review before their Special Grand Jury(ies); which addresses all issues which are presented hereon, and numerous other.
The Expose` includes the fact: that this is an unlawful government which has knowingly, willingly, willfully, and with full knowledge, worked outside the constraints of the constitutional contract for at least seventy (70) years, a fact which was reviewed by this court and congress, and found as true, as evidenced by the governments own records. Those involved, have erected numerous Acts, PDDs, EOs, rules, codes, and other, designed to inflict harm and damage against the People of this nation, against other nations, against this nation, the People's states, and communities as well.
- AS these were the facts then available, and when reviewed; and the government has knowingly failed to bring itself back within the contract since at least 1973, would those presently involved in knowing willful violations of the constitution, be committing breaches of the constitutional contract; and/or, indicating bad faith or other unlawful activities outside the contract?
- Would these be violations of the oaths of those whom are required to take those oaths, to support the contracts, as condition of office, and any who use the authority of the constitutions; when they knowingly and willingly fail or refuse to do so?
- Would these be actual or apparent criminal activities which would fall within the authority retained by the people of this nation to investigate, review, and prosecute those involved with the destruction of their states, their nation and its governments?
- Would the People not then be authorized to proceed, particularly when those in government: refuse; or, fail; and/or, knowingly, willingly, and, actively conspire to participate in such unlawful activity?
- Would the People: having discovered through investigation, that apparently, an entire federal circuit (6th) is in active and knowing complicity with others of the conspiracy at the state level; to commit deliberate criminal acts against the People, their states and their nation; have the authority to bring indictments from their Grand Jury(ies) for this conspiracy, complicity, criminal activity, other unlawful activities, and potential treason perpetrated against them, their states, and nation?
- Would the People, having performed their own investigations and apparently finding that:
from this nation's highest office to the lowest state enforcement division, this activity was not only sanctified; moreover, was being knowingly used to inflict harm and damage upon the People, their states, and their nation;
under their retained authority under their contracts with those who purport to govern, be able to use their own authority to bring those individuals to justice under their laws?
8 . If not, would this not be an indication that some fascist, socialist, tyranny, or other style of government foreign to the nature of the contract, had been erected unlawfully in their nation, displacing their governments, which must follow the constitutions and yield to the People's authority should they choose to wield such?
- If the government resisted the People's attempts to re-institute their lawful governments and remove the stench of these criminals and/or conspirators from their midst, would the government, refusing and failing to allow them that right and authority, be a criminal act under this court impression?
- If this court: failed to find it as criminal activity; or had worked to make it appear as lawful when unconstitutional, would that not then indicate that this highest court had also determined that it would work in active and knowing participation, collusion, complicity, or conspiracy with the others, to destroy this nation's true government?
- If this was then knowingly allowed to continue: would this indicate a state of lawlessness; in conflict with the purported "rule of law", which is a supposed claim of an apparent de facto government, which is now used as excuse to invade other nations?
- Would this not then display: that these are not honored individuals in that government; but, apparent liars, cheats, murderers, and thieves, which must be investigated, indicted, and prosecuted for their unlawful activity, to achieve the balance of justice, and to ensure the integrity of this nation?
- Would the erection of supposed immunities from prosecution, to protect those whom had actively worked to destroy this nation; not indicate that two (or more) sets of laws now existed, just as they did in Rome in its tyranny, or England in its monarchy, or Germany in its Nazism, or the U.S.S.R. in its communism, or Italy in fascism, as this is what was done within those governments?
- Would this not then be in direct conflict with the oaths required; the clauses contained in the contracts; and the authority of the People of this nation, which demands that the laws be applied equally to all; and make those whom govern take such oaths that they are to be prosecuted for such unlawful and/or unconstitutional activities?
(copy of cdrom in covering included here in Writ/Demand as sent to courts and parties)
People's Exhibits
District court & appellate
Ohio courts and government
(end)
Table of contents
AUTHORITIES*
Petition 1-3
AUTHORITIES
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, Establish justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common Defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and Establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
ARTICLE III
Sect. 1. The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behavior, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.
Sect. 2. The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority; to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls; to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction; to controversies to which the United States shall be a party; to controversies between two or more states, between a state and Citizens of another state, between Citizens of different states, between Citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different States, and between a state, or the Citizens thereof and foreign States, Citizens or subjects.
In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be a party, the supreme court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the supreme court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.
The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury; and such trial shall be held in the state where the said crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any state, the trial shall be at such place or places as the Congress may by law have directed.
Article VI Clause 2
This constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, any thing in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.
PREAMBLE -Bill of Rights
Preamble to the bill of rights of the Constitution of the United States of America
Conventions of a number of States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will but ensure the beneficent ends of its institution
(1791)
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
(1791)
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. (bold for area of interest)
THE PEOPLE'S DEMAND FOR ENTRY BEFORE THEIR COURT
Demand for answers to Questions and/or
DEMAND FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND ANSWERS
FOR IMMEDIATE FULL COURT REVIEW
Comes the People of America, through counsel, to demand that this court respect entry by the People under their stated authority under Amendments / Articles IX and X of the contract, now referred to generally, as Constitution of The United States of America.
Within this contract, under those clauses, the People have retained their authority and Rights to numerous activities which no court, government office, official, agent, agency, or other; may deny, interfere with, destroy, inhibit, remove, erect barriers against, refuse, dismiss, obstruct, or otherwise work against. The People have claimed that authority here; and in southern district court of Ohio, which has refused and/or obstructed such.
This court has apparently erected Rules, which it claims the People [in their nation which the founders created specifically for them to control] must follow, or the People may not address their own created court; or their issues may be refused or returned, or may otherwise not be addressed by their court. This appears to indicate that this court has determined it will erect some form of barrier against the People and their Rights and authority.
Whereas, this supreme court does not lawfully exist unless under the Peoples' contract, wherein it gains authority for existence and general authority which it might wield; moreover, United States of America and United States, over which this court has jurisdiction, do not exist unless proceeding under authority of this contract amongst the People, therefore, this court and those of government have no greater authority than the Peoples' contract over you, and under which you are under obligation. No where within the contract do you find your authority to refuse the People of this nation. For further review, argument, or other, you may review the Expose' Volumes on the CDRom, which was retained within this court's clerk office; and/or within the records of the Sixth Circuit Judicial Counsel; and/or USDC records in southern Ohio, of which the People demand certiorari. Within those records, this court will find Questions it is to answer, so the People may begin to review and remove, this apparent syndicate racketeering and other organized criminal activity from their nation via Special Grand Juries, and petite juries. A copy of those questions in attached.
The People have presented materials for review by this court upon Cdrom, which will allow this court to magnify, view upon giant screen, duplicate, or otherwise, these materials. The Expose` Volumes, the PDFs of the proceedings in 6th Circuit, and PDFs of materials submitted to district court, and other materials as submitted are contained thereon. The court will accept these materials in this form, and use them in their review.
Wherefore, under the People of this nations retained and undeniable authority, this court will:
- accept their immediate entry before this court without further sale, denial, or delay;
- answer the questions presented for impression so those answers might be reviewed within the Special Grand Jury(ies), and petite jury(ies);
- and supply the required responses as you have been directed, and/or, are required, or, whereby otherwise ensuring the People and this nation are relieved of this apparent syndicate racketeering and other organized criminal activities.
signature block removed
Peoples' counsel (937) xxxxxxxxx
C/o Deerfield Inn
2871 US 35E
West Alexandria, Ohio
Postal Area 45381
Email - m_brahier@hotmail.com underscore
Web - http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/