9/28/2011 (links updated November 6, 2018)
PHOENIX — Exactly three year and two months later, doing everything possible as a homeless/jobless pro-se petitioner/defendant to see if a U.S. court would uphold the Constitution, it is officially over.
My final brief in Wilkins v. Arizona (CV-10-0443-PHX-JWS(MEA)) was filed last week, which was the objection to U.S. Magistrates recommendation to deny habeas corpus. Granted, I could appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (even though the Magistrate recommends dismissal with prejudice), I have expended enough time and energy proving what I needed too. My other pending federal litigation, Wilkins v. Maricopa County, Joseph Arpaio, et al. (CV-09-1380-LOA) was pending in the Ninth Circuit as of today, awaiting an opening brief from me. However, I will not prosecute the appeal further as again, my point has been proven and I am at peace.
The entirety of my final brief (Objection), which basically is the personal statement I wanted on the court record is copied and pasted below. You may view the PDF here. You may also read the PDF of the U.S. Magistrate’s Report and Recommendation here. Note: the following was written and filed on September 21, 2011, the same afternoon Mr. Troy Davis was murdered (“lynched”) by the State of Georgia.
For more on the Wilkins case (the administrator of this website), please click the “55 Days In Maricopa County Jail” link.
This objection will ultimately be deemed “vituperative,” “conspiracy,” “paranoid” and/or some other adjectives to minimize the truth herein, and likely will not even be read by Respondent (“Arizona”) nor the Court. Regardless, Petitioner (“Wilkins”) objects to the Report and Recommendation issued by the Court, and will keep this short. The final order from this Court needs to at least include the reality that facts means very little in prosecutions of average citizens (“subjects”). It is well established that U.S. courts are bound by the culture and tradition of viewing all evidence “in the light most favorable to the prosecution,” Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307, 319 (1979), regardless of indisputable facts and malice committed by them.
The facts remain that:
1. The State of Arizona prosecuted the Petitioner on charges which they claim affected “multiple victims.” Once the Petitioner completed the 140+ hours of slave labor U.S. municipalities refer as “community service,” Arizona then admitted there were in fact no victims in this case (see page 4, near bottom (“victim status”)). In short, this entire case was prosecuted on false pretenses, thus a fundamental miscarriage of justice which the Court refuses to acknowledge.
2. The Maricopa County Superior Court, sua sponte, unlawfully vacated Petitioner’s trial without a written motion, which violates the Sixth Amendment’s speedy trial provisions.
3. State of Arizona failed to produce grand jury transcripts, court transcripts, and files from public defenders – upon motion by Petitioner requesting said discovery – once it finally “granted” the Petitioner his Sixth Amendment right to represent himself in post-conviction proceedings. Petitioner was denied self-representation in the prosecution stage.
4. The alleged “plea agreement” signed by the Petitioner was expired and altered after he unwittingly signed it.
I’ve re-hashed these facts and many others to every level of Arizona state courts, all of which were completely ignored and denied without review or explanation. Now this Court did everything in its power to rationalize all the egregious constitutional violations to make sure “the State” can continue their persecutions unabated. This Court has established that it does not even matter that the prosecutor responsible for the instant case, Andrew Thomas, will likely be disbarred by the Arizona Supreme Court for several malicious prosecutions over the past five years. The State Bar, however, is only taking these realities to heart because the malicious prosecutions involve their own people (county supervisors, county judges, etc.). In other words, it is unconstitutional and unlawful for Andrew Thomas to maliciously prosecute state agents, but perfectly legal and encouraged for him to do so to average subjects to “the state.” The instant case, if nothing else, is now documented precedent of preferential treatment for government/ruling class citizens over all remaining U.S. subjects.
A few months ago, the United States Supreme Court reversed a $14 million judgment against Louisiana prosecutor Harry Connick, Sr., even though it was clearly established that Connick’s office wantonly and deliberately withheld exculpatory evidence which left an innocent man sitting on death row for 14 years. Connick v. Thompson , 563 U. S. ____ (2011). The goal of U.S. courts is the protection of its prosecutors and the upholding of malicious convictions of unwitting American subjects, regardless of facts and malice by said prosecutors. Americans cannot be called “citizens,” as all rights allegedly enumerated in the U.S. Constitution simply do not apply in real life situation, except of course, absolute immunity for prosecutorial malice and manipulation. See Eleventh Amendment. As Petitioner sits writing this document, a man named Troy Davis will be executed by the State of Georgia in a matter of hours, even though there is no physical evidence tying him to the “murder” the State of Georgia convicted him of. Again, it is not about facts, it is about furthering the U.S. police state and keeping the subjects in line. The U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari of Mr. Davis’ appeal because of some “procedural bar” U.S. courts may invoked whenever and however they choose. Davis v. State, 263 Ga 5, 426 S.E.2d 844, cert. denied, 510 U.S. 950, 114 S. Ct. 396 (1993); Davis v. Terry, 465 F.3d 1249, 1256 (11th Cir. 2006), cert. denied, 127 S. Ct. 3010 (2007). Again, American “subjects” must follow every procedure verbatim and on time, or forever lose that potential slim opportunity at truth setting them free. But again, government agents can violates any and all statutory and procedural guidelines and win their convictions and have them upheld by other (“higher”) courts.
The Thirteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution did not end slavery; it simply moved it to U.S. courts and prisons. Per said amendment, slavery is illegal unless the slave has been “duly convicted” in a U.S. court. This was the great compromise between Confederate states (and territories, i.e. Arizona) and the Union, which guaranteed slavery would still exist, as long as a “conviction” happened in a U.S. court. This arrangement between U.S. courts, prosecutors, and corporations has made private prison giants Corrections Corporation of America and GEO Group two of the most prosperous business in America, despite economic downturn almost everywhere else. This arrangement also got 140+ hours of slave labor by the Petitioner for Maricopa County.
The Court and Arizona now believe they have won because the Petitioner will endure a life sentence of “felony record,” which is the new Dred Scott, Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857), if you will…rendering millions of Americans third class human chattel. Again, the Thirteenth (and Fourteenth) Amendments overturned Dred Scott and established the “felony class” in lieu of the “slave class.” I do give credit, in that the European imperial empire has kept their chattel stock and convinced a vast majority of Americans this does not exist anymore. It is very clever, especially as Petitioner has read hundreds of denied habeas corpus petitions which judges use any and every possible reason to uphold the “slavery.” However, many of us, including myself, are now not accepting this imperial government as legitimate…only as an occupier which manipulates its human subjects. I am now free, as the answers and truth I’ve sought are now concrete and indisputable. I thank the Court for establishing once and for all that Americans not part of the Ruling elite, are subjects to the state, tenants in their own home, and do not even own our own bodies. “The ownership of all property is in the state; individual so-called ‘ownership’ is only by virtue of the government…and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the state.” Sen. Doc. No. 43, 73rd Congress, 1st Session. All American subjects are listed as “a tenant” in the home they supposedly “own.” An illegitimate government, operating under false premises of freedom and liberty, means Petitioner is a free soul now, despite what “the state” does to impede on that. The truth has set me free.
Petitioner, again, would just like to thank Arizona courts and U.S. District Courts for their clarification on the issues herein. It is established that facts do no matter in these courts, so despite the Petitioner’s objection to the Thirteenth Amendment slavery agreement the U.S. government made, it will continue unabated. I look forward to reading more of your decisions in the f
uture and educating the masses about the underlying goals of U.S. “justice.”
Submitted this 21th Day of September, 2011.
The Felony Class: U.S. “Justice System” Creates Class Of Serfs (4/27/2011)