WHY I’M REFUSING TO COMPLY – THE LAW HAS NO LEGAL BASIS
First I went to prison for breaking the law, even
though the law wasn’t followed in order to convict me. Then I went to jail for
5 months for talking about changing the very law that had ruined/imprisoned me,
inviolation of my rights. Then the state officials who jailed me broke the law,
by jailing me for exercising
my first amendment Rights and its okay according to state officials. So I
have no intention of even showing up in court. It’s apparent to me that the DREAD SCOTT DOCTRINE is still used here
in New Jersey courtrooms.“Negroes are so inferior that no whiteman is bound to respect the
rights of a Negro..DREAD
SCOTT Vs SANFORD,1857,
19 How. 393 U.S.-1857. Why should I, the law doesn’t respect me and state
officials are allowed to break the law without fear of arrest? They actually
claim to be immune from the law. African-American men are murdered by law
enforcement officials all the time who think we aren’t entitled to the same
protections the U.S. Constitution spell-out. Why should I respect any law? I
was arrested 3 times for complaining to the Federal authorities that I had been
“criminally denied my free speech rights” by state officials, even after a
Federal Judge ruled that my RIGHTS were violated.
(www.njweedman.com/hypocrite.html).
But I base the refusal to comply with this new law with legal authority, the U.S. Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme Court has given permission to ignore a law that is repugnant to the Constitution. I have a RIGHT to ignore an “unconstitutional law”, I’m invoking that RIGHT in this case!
"No one is bound to obey
an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it." 16th American Jurisprudence 2nd edition, Sec 177, late 2nd, Sec
256. "All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and
void." - Marbury vs. Madison,
5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803). “Where rights secured by the Federal
Constitution are involved, there can be no rule-making or legislation which
would abrogate them”.
Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436
p. 491- "An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights;
it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in
legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed." Norton
vs. Shelby County, 118 US 425 p. 442
Not only is the new DNA law a unconstitutional example of a EX POST FACTO Law the very orders requiring convicts to submit to DNA testing were issued EX-PARTE. Ex-parte; is just as unconstitutional as an EX POST FACTO law, due process requires!
Legal definition of a Ex Post facto law: a law that retroactively
alters a defendant's rights esp. by criminalizing and imposing punishment for
an act that was not criminal or punishable at the time it was committed, by
increasing the severity of a crime from its level at the time the crime was
committed, by
increasing the punishment for a crime from the punishment imposed at the time
the crime was committed, or by taking away from the protections (as
evidentiary protection) afforded the defendant by the law as it existed when
the act was committed. “Every law, which makes criminal an act that was
innocent when done, or which inflicts a greater punishment than the law annexed
to the crime when committed, is an ex post facto law within the prohibition of
the Constitution. Calder v. Bull,
3 U.S. (3 Dall.) 386, 390
(1798); Ex parte Garland,
EX PARTE: Upon or from one side only; one-sided; partial; as, an ex parte statement.{Ex parte application},
one made without notice or opportunity to oppose.{Ex parte council}, one that assembles at the request of only one of the parties in dispute.{Ex parte} {hearing or evidence} (Law), that which is had or taken by one side or party in the absence of the other.
.
On Sept 22, 2003 Gov McGreevey signs L. 2003, C. 183 into law. Immediately The Administrative Office of the Courts sends out two "memos" that were delivered to all county assignment Judges. This resulted in County Judges and Administrative Judges issuing orders to everyone to submit to DNA sampling. I received my order on Sept 30, 2003.
These Orders’s were infact “Ex-Parte Orders” and citizens who received this Order were not given Notice or Opportunity to be heard (oppose or consent) which absolutely violates Due Process. Also, there is nothing in this law that sets out what the penalty is for violating this Order; I guess I’ll find out on Dec. 12th before Judge Millenky in Camden County Superior Court.
As of December 4, 2003, John Weick, of the AOC, who is responsible for implementing this law into the Courts has said, “that it is up to the Attorney General's Office to decide what they want to do when someone refuses to comply with the Order”. – WHAT, “who’s” been smoking the ganja, now? That is absurd!
What this means is: In effect the Judge (Judiciary) is acting as the enforcing agency for the Legislature by enforcing the law, which is not the function of the Judiciary. This same argument can be made for all objections to the Order where this matter comes before the Court; i.e. a contempt hearing. Which I now have scheduled for Dec.12th, 2003 in Camden Superior Court. How does the court even try to attempt to serve as the enforcer of a law, this doesn’t fit into any of the checks and balances system I learned in school. Why doesn’t the Constitution apply?
Maybe because we are prisoners/parolee’s and
probationers the court thinks we aren’t
entitled to the protections of the Constitution? This (btw) is
absolutely incorrect. The US Supreme Court has consistently ruled that “prison walls do not form a barrier separating prison inmates from the
protections of the constitution.” Turner V Safley, 482 U.S. 78, 84 (1987).
For every citizen in NJ, when a law is passed, and it
is believed to have been violated, an arrest is made by the police/prosecutor
and then that person comes before the Judiciary. APPARENTLY state officials think: For “convicts”
(citizens) under this Ex PARTE Order Requiring DNA, the legislature has made an
illegal EX POST FACTO law and the Judiciary itself is (prosecuting) enforcing
this law. It’s not supposed to work that way, it is very apparent to me that
this law is so flawed that it would never pass constitutional muster the way it
is now written, or how its been implemented. I refuse to comply. Not only do I
say McGreevey can kiss my ass but he’s an ASS for signing this crap!
SUBMITTED BY A “INFERIOR
NIGGER” WHO WAS LOCKED UP WITH LAW-BOOKS,
ROBERT EDWARD FORCHION, Jr
“NJWEEDMAN.COM”