In The United States District Court<br />For the Eastern District of Texas<br />Beaumont Division<br />Louis Charles Hamil...
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss

5,876

Published on

Class Action (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) vs. President Andrew Johnson, President Rutherfore B. Hayes

Published in: Education, Lifestyle
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
5,876
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
12
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "In the united states district court plaintiff motion in oppostion to dismiss"

  1. 1. In The United States District Court<br />For the Eastern District of Texas<br />Beaumont Division<br />Louis Charles Hamilton II<br />(Negro African American)<br />Plaintiff Civil Action 1:10-CV-00808<br />And All other African (Negroes) <br />Americans in and for<br />The United States of America<br />Plaintiff(s)<br />Vs. <br />United States of America,<br />Defendant<br />And<br />Vs.<br />President Andrew Johnson,<br />Co-Defendant<br />President Rutherford B. Hayes<br />Co-Defendant<br /> Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Motion in Opposition<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African Americans herein files their Motion in opposition of Defendant(s) (The United States of America) Motion to Dismiss cause no. 1:10-CV-00808<br /> By Defendant (The United States of America) Attorney(s) of record, John M. Bales, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Texas,<br /> And Assistant United States Attorney Andrea L. Parker for the Eastern District of Texas.<br />Pro Se (Negro) Plaintiff herein” Louis Charles Hamilton II”, His Family, and past descendants and all (Negro) Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans and there (Negro) descendants <br />Within the Defendant (The United States of America) to include but not limited to all other controlling Interest thereof the Defendant (The United States of America); <br />Being race of (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African Americans herein reply, rejoin, retort and have company before the Honorable Justice, Judge Ron Clark and Honorable U.S. Magistrate Judge Keith F. Giblin as follows:<br />1.<br />Defendant (The United States of America) by and through its attorneys of records at this time John M. Bales, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Texas,<br /> And Assistant United States Attorney Andrea L. Parker for the Eastern District of Texas moves for dismissal of Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) complaint with prejudice no less,<br />Pursuant to federal rule of civil procedure 12(b) (1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and/or 12(b) (6) for failure to state a claim for relief which the Honorable Court may grant on behalf of the Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s).<br />2.<br />Pro Se (Negro) Plaintiff Louis Charles Hamilton II herein appearing on behalf of himself, family, and All (Negro) Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans within the Defendant (The United States of America) redirects the “Honorable Justices” concentration, awareness and attention <br />3.<br />Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) having fully stated with great carful detail numerous “direct cause” of actions and claims for reliefs being care for brought, and sought before this Honorable United States Federal Eastern District Court of Texas<br /> To render the “Honorable Justice” that full civil redress being address, obtain and contemplated before a “Jury Trial” on behalf of not just the Plaintiff herein (Hamilton II) and his personal claims raise herein regards to Defendant (The United States of America) <br />4.<br />Direct, abandon, desert, neglect and total carelessness over the (Negro) Plaintiff and (among others) Plaintiff(s) having full civil rights for Life, Peace, Dignity, Equal Justice in the full Protection of the laws of the United States of America within the Defendant (The United States of America) state namely Utah <br />5.<br />All (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) fully being in protection from prosecution of “The Church of Jesus Christ” of “Latter Day Saints” past, present teaching of the racial “Curse of Cain” doctrine with its “having direct effect” upon the Plaintiff (Hamilton II) and his lost of family as described herein the complaint.<br /> 6.<br />To include but not limited to “The Church of Jesus Christ” of Latter Day Saints continue prosecution of the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) by “The Church of Jesus Christ” of “Latter Day Saints” teaching of the racial “Curse of Cain” doctrine and its continue effects being blueprint, and applied all (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) are still curse of the skin of darkness and their for fully of the Devil.<br />7.<br />Plaintiff respectfully assert both John M. Bales, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Texas,<br /> And Assistant United States Attorney Andrea L. Parker for the Eastern District of Texas on behalf of the Defendant (The United States of America) snag, hindrance, fail, fold, found difficulty and gone completely on the “blink” <br />8.<br />In Defendant (The United States of America) legal civil reply herein and addressing even one single of Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) claims of “badly behaved” “numerous problem(s)”, “issues”, and “crisis” in dealing with “The Church of Jesus Christ” of “Latter Day Saints” teaching of the racial “Curse of Cain” doctrine, and Defendant (The United States of America) state namely Utah having a full private enclave closed society LDS Nation<br /> And it’s continue effects being blueprint, and applied upon all (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) herein 2011 we are still curse of the skin of darkness and there for fully of the Devil.<br />9.<br />Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) respectfully furtherance assert before the “Honorable Justice” both John M. Bales, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Texas,<br /> And Assistant United States Attorney Andrea L. Parker for the Eastern District of Texas on behalf of the Defendant (The United States of America) took complete resolution with intention in a “single-mindedness” girls/guys gone completely on the 2011 “blink” legal approach<br /> Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) herein having not suffered at the “direct target hands” of the described Defendant(s) (The United States of America) from kidnapping to “Slave Codes”, Black Codes and latter “Jim Crow” Laws well into the 1960’s time frame<br />As all being intent against the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) by device of mutable criminal acts to include but not limited direct acts of “Death” against the Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) herein for profit. <br />10.<br />Defendant (The United States of America) having inserts with “Cruel Killer Punishment No Less” a substandard tactics of racial division, inferior, and segregation blueprint purposed<br /> Against the Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) peace, rights, will, and dignity thus fully being imposed by the said Defendant herein (The United States of America) <br />Which Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) shall enforce upon each and described every such claims, damages and suffering raise herein before the Honorable Justice for relief as described in the Complaint. <br />11. <br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) cause of action(s) <br />Count (1). <br /> Defamation of Character <br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) state before the “Honorable Justice” Defamation—also called calumny, vilification, traducement, slander (for transitory statements), and libel (for written, broadcast, or otherwise published words)—is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government, or nation a negative image. It is usually a requirement that this claim be false and that the publication is communicated to someone other than the person defamed (the claimant).<br />12. <br />Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) first furtherance’s bestow before the “Honorable Court” the actual Defendant herein (The United States of America)<br />A "Complete" United States History “Time Line”<br />1430Portuguese start voyages down the west coast of Africa1492Columbus arrives in Western Hemisphere1509-1547Henry VIII rules EnglandProtestant reformation begins in England1558-1603Reign of Queen Elizabeth I.  Ireland conquered by England.1607Jamestown founded1612Tobacco made a profitable crop by John Rolfe1619First group of blacks brought to VirginiaFirst legislative assembly meets in Virginia1620First Pilgrims in Plymouth1622Indian attacks in Virginia end hopes of becoming a bi-racial society1629Great Puritan migration to Massachusetts Bay1636Harvard founded1676Bacon's Rebellion1686Creation of Dominion of New England1688Glorious Revolution in England1700250,000 settlers in English colonies1704First colonial newspaper1720sColonial economic life quickens1739-1744Great Awakening1756-1763French and Indian War1763Proclamation Line established1763-1764Pontiac's Rebellion1764-1765Sugar Act and Stamp Act Controversies1766Declaratory Act1767Townshend Act, New York Assembly suspended1770Boston Massacre1772Committees of Correspondence formed1773Boston Tea Party1774Coercive Acts, First Continental Congress convenes1775Revolution begins with fighting at Lexington and Concord1776Declaration of Independence1777British defeated at Saratoga1778French join the war against the British1781Battle of YorktownArticles of Confederation ratified1783Peace signed in Paris1784-1787Northwest Ordinance of 1784, 1785, and 17871786Annapolis Convention1787Shays' RebellionConstitutional Convention1788Federalist Papers writtenConstitution ratified1789George Washington inaugurated as President of the United StatesFrench Revolution begins1790Capital placed on the Potomac River1793Citizen Genet1794Whiskey RebellionIndians defeated at Fallen Timbers1795Jay Treaty, Pinckney Treaty1798Un-declared war with FranceAlien and Sedition ActsKentucky and Virginia Resolutions1800Jefferson elected1803Louisiana Purchase1807-1809Embargo in effect1808Slave trade ended1809Non-intercourse Act1812War with England1814Treaty of Ghent1820Missouri Compromise1820sFirst labor unions formedRomanticism flourished in America1823Monroe Doctrine1828Andrew Jackson elected1830sRailroad era begins1831Nat Turner's rebellionLiberator founded1832Nullification crisis1834Whig party formed1835Texas Revolution, Republic of Texas established1840sManifest DestinyTelegraph and railroads create a communications revolution1846Mexican War begins1848Treaty of Guadeloupe Hidalgo ended Mexican War.  U. S. acquires California and territory of New Mexico which includes present-day Nevada, Utah, Arizona, new Mexico, and part of Colorado.1849Gold discovered in California1850Compromise of 1850California admitted to the unionFugitive Slave Law strengthened1853Gadsden Purchase1854Kansas-Nebraska ActRepublican Party formed1856Violence in KansasSenator Sumner attacked in the Senate1858Lincoln-Douglas Debates1859John Brown's raid on Harper's Ferry1860Democratic Party splits apartAbraham Lincoln elected 16th President of the United StatesLower South secedes1861Confederate States of America formedCivil War begins at Fort SumterUpper South secedesNorth is defeated at the first battle of Bull Run1862Battle of AntietamMorill Tariff, Homestead ActEmancipation Proclamation issued (effective January 1, 1863)1864Grant's wilderness campaignSherman takes AtlantaSherman's "March to the Sea"1865Sherman takes South and North CarolinaLee surrenders at Appomattox Court HouseThirteenth Amendment abolishes slaveryLincoln assassinatedAndrew Johnson becomes PresidentKKK formed1867First Reconstruction Act launches Radical ReconstructionAlaska purchased1868Fourteenth Amendment guarantees Civil RightsJohnson impeached1870Fifteenth Amendment forbids denial of vote on racial grounds1870sTerrorism against blacks in South, flourishing of Darwinism and ideas of racial inferiority1876End of ReconstructionBattle of Little Big Horn1877Munn v. Illinois:  Court rules states may regulate warehouse rates1879Stand Oil Trust formed1880sBig Business emerge1883Railroad companies divide nation into four time zonesPendleton Civil Service Act1886Haymarket Riots1887Interstate Commerce CommissionDavies Act1890Sherman Anti-Trust ActMassacre at Wounded KneeSherman Silver Purchase Act1890-1920Fifteen million "new" immigrants1893Repeal of Sherman Silver Purchase Act1895Pollock v FarmersCourt strikes down income tax1898War with SpainHawaii annexed1899Peace with Spain, U. S. receives Philippines, Samoa, Guam, and Puerto Rico1900Gold Standard1901Theodore Roosevelt becomes President1904Roosevelt Corollary to Monroe Doctrine1904-1914Panama Canal built1906Hepburn Act, Pure Food and Drug ActThe Jungle1912Election of Woodrow Wilson1913Sixteen Amendment authorizing income tax ratifiedSeventeenth Amendment providing for direct elections of Senators ratifiedFederal Reserve System begunWilson broadens segregation in civil service1914World War 1 beginsU. S. troops occupy Vera Cruz1915U. S. troops sent to HaitiLusitania sunk, U. S. intervenedKKK revived1916Germany issues Sussex pledge1917Russian RevolutionU. S. enters WW11918WW1 endsTreaty of Versailles1919Eighteenth Amendment prohibits alcoholic beveragesRed Scare1920Nineteenth Amendment gives women the right to voteFirst radio station KDKA in Pittsburgh1921Washington Naval Conference1924Revenue Act slashes income tax on wealthy and corporations1927Lindbergh crosses the Atlantic1929Stock market crashes1932Franklin Roosevelt elected1933Bank holiday, "Hundred Days"NRA, AAA, FDIC, TVA, FERA, CCCTwentieth Amendment changes inauguration day to JanuaryTwenty-first Amendment repeals prohibitionHitler comes to power in Germany1934Gold standard terminatedSEC1935Social Security Act, WP, NLRACIO formedU. S. Begins neutrality legislation1936FDR re-elected1937FDR attempts to pack Supreme CourtJapan invades China1938United States Housing AuthorityFair labor Standards ActHitler takes Austria, Munich Agreement1939World War 2 begins1940Roosevelt makes destroyers-for-bases deal with the BritishFall of FranceFirst peacetime draft1941Lend-Lease, Battle of Britain, Hitler attacks USSRAtlantic CharterJapan attacks Pearl Harbor1942Allied year of disasterU. S. interns JapaneseU. S. halts Japanese at Coral Sea and Midway1943Tide turns against AxisRussia wins at Stalingrad, unconditional surrender demandedItaly invaded1944France invadedBombing of Japan beginsRussia sweeps through Eastern EuropePhilippines liberated1945YaltaFDR diesGermany surrendersAtom bombsEnd of WW 21976U. S. - USSR relations worsen"Iron Curtain" speech1947Cold War beginsMarshall PlanContainment1948-1949Berlin AirliftTaft-HartleyMilitary integrated1949NATORussia explodes the bombCommunists control China1950Korean WarJoseph McCarthy1951Twenty-second Amendment limits the President to two terms1952Dwight Eisenhower elected President1953Industries agree on guaranteed annual wage1954Brown v. Board of Education, Supreme Court strikes down "separate but equal."Vietnam divided1955Montgomery Bus Boycott, emergence of Martin Luther King, Jr.1957SputnikEisenhower DoctrineLittle rock CrisisCivil Rights Act1958First U. S. satellite and ICBMNASAU. S. occupies Lebanon1960U-2 shot down over RussiaSoviet and Chinese splitJohn F. Kennedy elected Presidentnon-violent protests against segregation1961Freedom ridesTwenty-third Amendment gives District of Columbia the right to vote for PresidentBerlin crisisPeace CorpsBay of Pigs16,000 in Vietnam1962University of Mississippi integratedCuban Missile Crisis1963Civil Rights march on WashingtonJFK assassinatedFeminine Mystique1964Free speech movement at BerkeleyBeatlesTwenty-fourth Amendment outlaws the poll taxWar on povertyGulf of Tonkin1965Great SocietyOperation Rolling Thunder in VietnamMalcolm X assassinated1966Black PowerFrance withdraws from NATON. O. W. formed1967Detroit RiotPeace movement in the U. S.1968Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther Kin murderedTet OffensiveJohnson won't seek re-electionRichard Nixon elected President1969VietnamizationFirst man on the moonNixon proposed New Federalism1970Massacre at Kent StateEPA establishedCambodian invasion creates anti-war turbulenceSALT talks begin1971Nixon opens talks with ChinaWage-price controlsMy Lai massacre revealedPentagon Papers published1972Intensive bombing of North VietnamWatergateNixon re-electedGNP over 1 trillion1973Cease-fire in VietnamU. S. forces withdrawSpiro Agnew resigns1974Watergate tapesNixon resigns, Ford's pardonSerious inflation and recession1975Vietnam falls44% of married women employed1976BicentennialJimmy Carter elected President1977Human rights1978Camp David AccordsPanama Canal treaties ratified1979SALT 2 completedU. S. recognizes chinaAmerican Embassy in Iran occupiedUSSR invaded Afghanistan1980U. S. boycotts Olympics, withdraws from SALT 2Reagan elected President1981American hostages held in Iran freed on Reagan's inauguration day (Plaintiff herein USN Hamilton II chain to Pearl Harbor Hawaii Flag Pole within 24 hrs. later.) (Again)…………….<br />13.<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African American will assert, show respectfully before the “Honorable Justice”, Slave codes were laws which each state, or colony, of the Defendant (The United States of America) enacted which defined the status of the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American slaves and the rights of(White) Defendant (The United States of America) masters.<br />14.<br /> (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African American will assert, show respectfully before the “Honorable Justice”, Such slaves codes by the Defendant (The United States of America) gave Defendant (The United States of America) (White) slave-owners “absolute power” over their (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American “human property”.<br />15.<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African Americans will show before the “Honorable Justice”, the Defendant (The United States of America) Provisions<br /> Definition of (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American "slaves" by the Defendant (The United States of America)<br />Virginia, 1650 <br />“Act XI. All persons except Negroes are to be provided with arms and ammunitions or be fined at the pleasure of the governor and council.” <br />Virginia, 1662 <br />“Whereas some doubts have arisen whether children got by any Englishmen upon a Negro shall be slave or Free, Be it therefore enacted and declared by this present Grand assembly, that all children born in this country shall be held bond or free only according to the condition of the mother." <br />Maryland, 1664 <br />“That whatsoever free-born [English] woman shall intermarry with any slave [...] shall serve the master of such slave during the life of her husband; and that all the issue of such free-born women, so married shall be slaves as their fathers were.” <br />Virginia, 1667 <br />“Act III. Whereas some doubts have arisen whether children that are slaves by birth [...] should by virtue of their baptism be made free, it is enacted that baptism does not alter the condition to the person as to his bondage or freedom; masters freed from this doubt may more carefully propagate Christianity by permitting slaves to be admitted to that sacrament.” <br />Virginia, 1682 <br />“Act I. It is enacted that all servants [...] which shall be imported into this country either by sea or by land, whether Negroes, Moors [Muslim North Africans], mulattoes or Indians who and whose parentage and native countries are not Christian at the time of their first purchase by some Christian [...] and all Indians, which shall be sold by our neighboring Indians, or any other trafficking with us for slaves, are hereby adjudged, deemed and taken to be slaves to all intents and purposes any law, usage, or custom to the contrary notwithstanding.” <br />Virginia, 1705<br />"All servants imported and brought into the Country...who were not Christians in their native Country...shall be accounted and be slaves. All Negro, mulatto and Indian slaves within this dominion...shall be held to be real estate." <br />South Carolina, 1712 <br />"Be it therefore enacted, by his Excellency, William, Lord Craven, Palatine.... and the rest of the members of the General Assembly, now met at Charles Town, for the South-west part of this Province, and by the authority of the same, That all negroes, mulatoes, mestizoes or Indians, which at any time heretofore have been sold, or now are held or taken to be, or hereafter shall be bought and sold for slaves, are hereby declared slaves; and they, and their children, are hereby made and declared slaves...." <br />Virginia, 1705 – "If any slave resists his master...correcting such a slave, and shall happen to be killed in such correction...the master shall be free of all punishment...as if such accident never happened." <br />South Carolina, 1712 - "Be it enacted by the authority aforesaid, That no master, mistress, overseer, or other person whatsoever, that hath the care and charge of any negro or slave, shall give their negroes and other slaves leave...to go out of their plantations.... Every slave hereafter out of his master's plantation, without a ticket, or leave in writing, from his master...shall be whipped...." <br />Louisiana, 1724 - "The slave who, having struck his master, his mistress, or the husband of his mistress, or their children, shall have produced a bruise, or the shedding of blood in the face, shall suffer capital punishment." <br /> Reading by (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American Black slaves illegal<br />Alabama, 1833, section 31 - "Any person or persons who attempt to teach any free person of color, or slave, to spell, read, or write, shall, upon conviction thereof by indictment, be fined in a sum not less than two hundred and fifty dollars, nor more than five hundred dollars." <br />Alabama, 1833, section 32 - "Any free person of color who shall write for any slave a pass or free paper, on conviction thereof, shall receive for every such offense, thirty-nine lashes on the bare back, and leave the state of Alabama within thirty days thereafter..." <br />Alabama, 1833, section 33 - "Any slave who shall write for any other slave, any pass or free-paper, upon conviction, shall receive, on his or her back, fifty lashes for the first offence, and one hundred lashes for every offence thereafter..." <br />16.<br />Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) respectfully assert before the “Honorable Court” Consequently Defendant (The United States of America) “slave codes” and slave patrols were established to act as a supplementary force to regulate the black population.<br />17.<br />Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) respectfully assert before the “Honorable Court” The Virginia Slave Codes of 1705 of the Defendant (The United States of America) were a series of laws enacted by the Colony of Virginia's House of Burgesses imposed upon<br />Regulating activities related to interactions between (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American “slaves” and Defendant (The United States of America) U.S. (White) citizens in the U.S. state of Virginia. <br />The enactment of the “Slave Codes” is the foundation blueprint of the Defendant (The United states of America) Virginia's slave legislation.<br />18.<br />Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) respectfully fully acknowledge before the “Honorable Justice” With respect during this precise time frame 1619-1865 <br />All (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) herein were in fact (Slaves) the first 10 Amendments to the Defendant (The United States of America) Constitution. <br />Called the "Bill of Rights", were ratified on December 15, 1791 and fully with all “intent purpose” did not under any circumstances apply to any of the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) herein.<br />19.<br />Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) respectfully assert Defendant (The United States of America) Amendments as follows:<br />AmendmentsProposal dateEnactment date1stProtects the freedom of religion, speech, and the press, as well as the right to assemble and petition the governmentSeptember 25, 1789December 15, 17912ndProtects the right to keep and bear armsSeptember 25, 1789December 15, 17913rdProhibits the forced quartering of soldiers out of war timeSeptember 25, 1789December 15, 17914thProhibits unreasonable searches and seizures and sets out requirements for search warrants based on probable causeSeptember 25, 1789December 15, 17915thSets out rules for indictment by grand jury and eminent domain, protects the right to due process, and prohibits self-incrimination and double jeopardySeptember 25, 1789December 15, 17916thProtects the right to have a fair and speedy public trial by jury, including the rights to be notified of the accusations, to confront the accuser, to obtain witnesses and to retain counselSeptember 25, 1789December 15, 17917thProvides for the right to trial by jury in certain civil cases, according to common lawSeptember 25, 1789December 15, 17918thProhibits excessive fines and excessive bail, as well as cruel and unusual punishmentSeptember 25, 1789December 15, 17919thAsserts the existence of unenumerated rights retained by the peopleSeptember 25, 1789December 15, 179110thLimits the powers of the federal government to those delegated to it by the ConstitutionSeptember 25, 1789December 15, 179111thImmunity of states from suits from out-of-state citizens and foreigners not living within the state borders. Lays the foundation for sovereign immunityMarch 4, 1794February 7, 179512thRevises presidential election proceduresDecember 9, 1803June 15, 180413thAbolishes slavery and involuntary servitude, except as punishment for a crimeJanuary 31, 1865December 6, 186514thDefines citizenship, contains the Privileges or Immunities Clause, the Due Process Clause, the Equal Protection Clause, and deals with post-Civil War issuesJune 13, 1866July 9, 186815thProhibits the denial of suffrage based on race, color, or previous condition of servitudeFebruary 26, 1869February 3, 187016thAllows the federal government to collect income taxJuly 12, 1909February 3, 191317thRequires senators to be directly electedMay 13, 1912April 8, 191318thEstablishes Prohibition of alcohol (Repealed by Twenty-first Amendment)December 18, 1917January 16, 191919thEstablishes women's suffrageJune 4, 1919August 18, 192020thFixes the dates of term commencements for Congress (January 3) and the President (January 20); known as the "lame duck amendment"March 2, 1932January 23, 193321stRepeals the Eighteenth AmendmentFebruary 20, 1933December 5, 193322ndLimits the president to two terms, or a maximum of 10 years (i.e., if a Vice President serves not more than one half of a President's term, they can be elected to a further two terms)March 24, 1947February 27, 195123rdProvides for representation of Washington, D.C. in the Electoral CollegeJune 16, 1960March 29, 196124thProhibits the revocation of voting rights due to the non-payment of poll taxesSeptember 14, 1962January 23, 196425thCodifies the Tyler Precedent; defines the process of presidential successionJuly 6, 1965February 10, 196726thEstablishes 18 as the national voting ageMarch 23, 1971July 1, 197127thPrevents laws affecting Congressional salary from taking effect until the beginning of the next session of CongressSeptember 25, 1789May 5 or 7, 1992<br />20.<br />Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Respectfully, assert before the “Honorable Justice” once again to take “Judicial notice” With respect during this precise time frame 1619- December 9, 1803 The Defendant (The United States of America) instituted the 1st through 12th Amendments to their Constitution as described above in paragraph (19) above with an Enactment date June 15, 1804.<br />21. <br />All (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African Americans herein respectfully fully acknowledge before the “Honorable Justice” during the exact time frame 1619-December 9th, 1803 <br />All (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American herein were in fact (Slaves) to include but limited to the first (12) Amendments to the Defendant (The United States of America) Constitution <br />Fully with all “intent purpose” did not under any circumstances apply to any of the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African Americans herein.<br />22.<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African Americans herein respectfully assert “at this time also” before the “Honorable Justice” Natives Americans (Indians) meaning “all Indians”, which shall be sold by The Defendant (The United States of America) by defendant neighboring Indians, or any other trafficking with Defendant (The United States of America) for slaves, are hereby adjudged, deemed and taken to be (Indians) as slaves to all intents and purposes any law, usage, or custom to the contrary notwithstanding.” Virginia, 1682 “Act I.<br />23.<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African Americans herein respectfully assert before the “Honorable Justice” In 1865, the Defendant (The United States of America) <br /> Louisiana legislature implemented shortly after the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American slaves were emancipated “black codes” into effect. <br />24. <br />Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) assert before the “Honorable Justice” Race was defined by blood; the presence of any amount of black blood made one (Negro) African American black , employment was required of all (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) freedmen; violators faced vagrancy charges <br />Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) (Negro) Freedmen could not assemble without the presence of a white person under Defendant (The United States of America) Black Codes.<br />25.<br />Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) (Negro) Freedmen were assumed to be agricultural workers and their duties and hours were tightly regulated under Defendant (The United States of America) Black Codes.<br />26.<br />Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) (Negro) Freedmen were not to be taught to read or write under Defendant (The United States of America) Black Codes<br />27.<br />Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) (Negro) having Public facilities being segregated under Defendant (The United States of America) Black Codes<br />28.<br />Any (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African Americans Violators of this Defendant (The United States of America) enacted by the Co-Defendant (President Andrew Johnson) Black Codes laws were subject to being whipped or branded or worst. <br />29.<br /> (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American herein respectfully assert the Defendant (The United States of America) state namely Mississippi black codes as follows:<br />"Negroes must make annual contracts for their labor in writing; if they should run away from their tasks, they forfeited their wages for the year. Whenever it was required of them they must present licenses (in a town from the mayor; elsewhere from a member of the board of police of the beat) citing their places of residence and authorizing them to work. Fugitives from labor were to be arrested and carried back to their employers.<br /> Five dollars a head and mileage would be allowed such Negro catchers. It was made a misdemeanor, punishable with fine or imprisonment, to persuade a freedman to leave his employer, or to feed the runaway. Minors were to be apprenticed, if males until they were twenty-one, if females until eighteen years of age. Such corporal punishment as a father would administer to a child might be inflicted upon apprentices by their masters. Vagrants were to be fined heavily, and if they could not pay the sum, they were to be hired out to service until the claim was satisfied. Negroes might not carry knives or firearms unless they were licensed so to do. It was an offence, to be punished by a fine of $50 and imprisonment for thirty days, to give or sell intoxicating liquors to a Negro. When Negroes could not pay the fines and costs after legal proceedings, they were to be hired at public outcry by the sheriff to the lowest bidder...." <br />30. <br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American herein respectfully assert the Defendant (The United States of America) state namely South Carolina “Black Codes as follows:<br />"In South Carolina persons of color contracting for service were to be known as "servants and those with whom they contracted, as "masters." On farms the hours of labor would be from sunrise to sunset daily, except on Sunday.<br /> The Negroes Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) were to get out of bed at dawn. Time lost would be deducted from their wages, as would be the cost of food, nursing, etc., during absence from sickness. Absentees on Sunday must return to the plantation by sunset. House servants were to be at call at all hours of the day and night on all days of the week. <br />They must be "especially civil and polite to their masters, their masters' families and guests," and they in return would receive "gentle and kind treatment." Corporal and other punishment was to be administered only upon order of the district judge or other civil magistrate. <br />31.<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American herein respectfully assert Following the Death of Joseph Smith, Jr., in the Defendant (The United States of America) city of Carthage, Illinois, in 1844, the more than 11,000<br /> Brigham Young, the President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, emerged as the leader Brigham Young and the first band of Mormon pioneers came to the Salt Lake Valley on July 24, 1847.<br />32.<br /> Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) respectfully assert before the “Honorable Justice” Disputes between the Mormon inhabitants and the Defendant (The United States of America) US Government intensified due to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' practice of plural marriage, or polygamy, among its members. <br />The Mormons were pushing for the establishment of the State of Deseret. The Defendant (The United States of America) U.S. Government, which had been reluctant to admit a state the size of the proposed Deseret into the union, opposed the polygamous practices of the Mormons.<br />33. <br />Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) respectfully assert before the “Honorable Justice” Members of the LDS Church were viewed as un-American by the Defendant (The United States of America) and rebellious when news of their polygamous practices spread. <br />In 1857, particularly heinous accusations of abdication of government <br />And general immorality by former associate justice William W. Drummond, among others, <br />Caused the Defendant (The United States of America) administration of James Buchanan to send a secret military "expedition" to Utah.<br /> When the supposed rebellion should be quelled, Alfred Cumming would take the place of Brigham Young as territorial governor. The resulting conflict is known as the Defendant (The United States of America) Utah War.<br />34.<br />Plaintiff and Plaintiff furtherance’s respectfully state, assert before the “Honorable Justice” As troops approached Salt Lake City in northern Utah, nervous Mormon settlers attacked and killed 120 immigrants from Arkansas and Missouri in southern Utah. The slaughtered Fancher-Baker party was enroute to California. The attack became known as the Mountain Meadows massacre. <br />35.<br />The massacre became a point of contention between LDS leaders and the federal government for decades. Only one person, John D. Lee, was ever convicted of the murders, and he was executed at the massacre site.<br />36.<br />Before troops led by Albert Sidney Johnston entered the territory, Brigham Young ordered all residents of Salt Lake City to evacuate southward to Utah Valley and sent out a force, known as the Nauvoo Legion, to delay the government's advance. <br />Although wagons and supplies were burned, eventually the troops arrived in 1858, and Young surrendered official control to Cumming, although most subsequent commentators claim that Young retained true power in the territory. A steady stream of governors appointed by the president quit the position, often citing the traditions of their supposed territorial government. <br />37.<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American herein respectfully assert By agreement with “Brigham Young”, Johnston established Camp Floyd, 40 miles (60 km) away from Salt Lake City, to the southwest.<br />38.<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American herein respectfully assert Brigham Young and other Church Presidents and Apostles taught from 1848 until 1978 (130 year period) the Curse of Cain Doctrine; <br />That Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) herein "Negroes" are "cursed" and "inferior" and the children of Cain and were "less valiant" in the War in Heaven, <br />And thus all (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American blacks were "banned" (called "the priesthood-ban") from the Mormon priesthood and Mormon Temples until June 8th, 1978.<br />39.<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American herein respectfully assert Brigham Young preached that God's Law demanded that all interracial (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American couples should be "killed on the spot"<br /> Along with their (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American children by having their throats cut, and their blood spilling upon the ground. <br />Brigham Young preach this "blood atonement" practice should also be applied to thieves, adulterers, blasphemers (whose who call him or Joseph Smith "false prophets") and "apostates" (ex-Mormons). <br />Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African Americans herein assert before the Honorable Justice” There is ample evidence that "Blood Atonement" was regularly practiced in Utah from 1852 until 1877; the year Brigham Young died.<br />40.<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American herein respectfully assert Brigham Young and other Church Presidents and Apostles taught from 1848 until 1978 (130 year period) the Curse of Cain Doctrine; <br />That Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s)"Negroes" are "cursed" and "inferior" and the children of Cain and were "less valiant" in the War in Heaven, and thus all blacks were "banned" (called "the priesthood-ban") from the Mormon priesthood and Mormon Temples until June 8th, 1978.<br />41.<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American herein respectfully assert Brigham Young, successor to Joseph Smith, legalized Negro and Indian slavery in Defendant (The United States of America) Utah in 1850, and a number of Mormons (including Mormon Apostle Charles C. Rich) owned black slaves. <br />42.<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American herein respectfully assert before the Honorable Justice Defendant (The United States of America) state namely Utah <br />Had many "anti-Negro" segregationist laws against the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African Americans herein until the late 1960s in addition to the Curse of Cain Doctrine; teaching by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.<br />43.<br /> (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American herein respectfully assert the Defendant (The United States of America) imposed “Jim Crow Laws against the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African Americans Blacks herein Here is a sampling of laws from various Defendant (The United States of America) states:<br />43.<br />Nurses No person or corporation shall require any white female nurse to nurse in wards or rooms in hospitals, either public or private, in which negro men are placed. Alabama <br />44.<br />Buses All passenger stations in this state operated by any motor transportation company shall have separate waiting rooms or space and separate ticket windows for the white and colored races. Alabama <br />45.<br />Railroads The conductor of each passenger train is authorized and required to assign each passenger to the car or the division of the car, when it is divided by a partition, designated for the race to which such passenger belongs. Alabama <br />46.<br />Restaurants It shall be unlawful to conduct a restaurant or other place for the serving of food in the city, at which white and colored people are served in the same room, unless such white and colored persons are effectually separated by a solid partition extending from the floor upward to a distance of seven feet or higher, and unless a separate entrance from the street is provided for each compartment. Alabama <br />47.<br />Pool and Billiard Rooms It shall be unlawful for a negro and white person to play together or in company with each other at any game of pool or billiards. Alabama <br />48.<br />Toilet Facilities, Male Every employer of white or negro males shall provide for such white or negro males reasonably accessible and separate toilet facilities. Alabama <br />49.<br />Intermarriage The marriage of a person of Caucasian blood with a Negro, Mongolian, Malay, or Hindu shall be null and void. Arizona <br />50.<br />Intermarriage All marriages between a white person and a negro, or between a white person and a person of negro descent to the fourth generation inclusive, are hereby forever prohibited. Florida <br />51.<br />Cohabitation Any negro man and white woman, or any white man and negro woman, who are not married to each other, who shall habitually live in and occupy in the nighttime the same room shall each be punished by imprisonment not exceeding twelve (12) months, or by fine not exceeding five hundred ($500.00) dollars. Florida <br />52.<br />Education The schools for white children and the schools for negro children shall be conducted separately. Florida <br />53.<br />Juvenile Delinquents There shall be separate buildings, not nearer than one fourth mile to each other, one for white boys and one for negro boys. White boys and negro boys shall not, in any manner, be associated together or worked together. Florida <br />54.<br />Mental Hospitals The Board of Control shall see that proper and distinct apartments are arranged for said patients, so that in no case shall Negroes and white persons be together. Georgia <br />55.<br />Intermarriage It shall be unlawful for a white person to marry anyone except a white person. Any marriage in violation of this section shall be void. Georgia <br />56.<br />Barbers No colored barber shall serve as a barber [to] white women or girls. Georgia <br />57.<br />Burial The officer in charge shall not bury, or allow to be buried, any colored persons upon ground set apart or used for the burial of white persons. Georgia <br />58.<br />Restaurants All persons licensed to conduct a restaurant, shall serve either white people exclusively or colored people exclusively and shall not sell to the two races within the same room or serve the two races anywhere under the same license. Georgia <br />59.<br />Amateur Baseball It shall be unlawful for any amateur white baseball team to play baseball on any vacant lot or baseball diamond within two blocks of a playground devoted to the Negro race, and it shall be unlawful for any amateur colored baseball team to play baseball in any vacant lot or baseball diamond within two blocks of any playground devoted to the white race. Georgia <br />60.<br />Parks It shall be unlawful for colored people to frequent any park owned or maintained by the city for the benefit, use and enjoyment of white persons...and unlawful for any white person to frequent any park owned or maintained by the city for the use and benefit of colored persons. Georgia <br />61.<br />Wine and Beer All persons licensed to conduct the business of selling beer or wine...shall serve either white people exclusively or colored people exclusively and shall not sell to the two races within the same room at any time. Georgia <br />62.<br />Reform Schools The children of white and colored races committed to the houses of reform shall be kept entirely separate from each other. Kentucky <br />63.<br />Circus Tickets All circuses, shows, and tent exhibitions, to which the attendance of...more than one race is invited or expected to attend shall provide for the convenience of its patrons not less than two ticket offices with individual ticket sellers, and not less than two entrances to the said performance, with individual ticket takers and receivers, and in the case of outside or tent performances, the said ticket offices shall not be less than twenty-five (25) feet apart. Louisiana <br />64.<br />Housing Any person...who shall rent any part of any such building to a negro person or a negro family when such building is already in whole or in part in occupancy by a white person or white family, or vice versa when the building is in occupancy by a negro person or negro family, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not less than twenty-five ($25.00) nor more than one hundred ($100.00) dollars or be imprisoned not less than 10, or more than 60 days, or both such fine and imprisonment in the discretion of the court. Louisiana <br />65.<br />The Blind The board of trustees shall...maintain a separate building...on separate ground for the admission, care, instruction, and support of all blind persons of the colored or black race. Louisiana <br />66.<br />Intermarriage All marriages between a white person and a negro, or between a white person and a person of negro descent, to the third generation, inclusive, or between a white person and a member of the Malay race; or between the negro a nd a member of the Malay race; or between a person of Negro descent, to the third generation, inclusive, and a member of the Malay race, are forever prohibited, and shall be void. Maryland <br />67.<br />Railroads All railroad companies and corporations, and all persons running or operating cars or coaches by steam on any railroad line or track in the State of Maryland, for the transportation of passengers, are hereby required to provide separate cars or coaches for the travel and transportation of the white and colored passengers. Maryland <br />68.<br />Education Separate schools shall be maintained for the children of the white and colored races. Mississippi <br />69.<br />Promotion of Equality Any person...who shall be guilty of printing, publishing or circulating printed, typewritten or written matter urging or presenting for public acceptance or general information, arguments or suggestions in favor of social equality or of intermarriage between whites and negroes, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to fine or not exceeding five hundred (500.00) dollars or imprisonment not exceeding six (6) months or both. Mississippi <br />70.<br />Intermarriage The marriage of a white person with a negro or mulatto or person who shall have one-eighth or more of negro blood, shall be unlawful and void. Mississippi <br />71.<br />Hospital Entrances There shall be maintained by the governing authorities of every hospital maintained by the state for treatment of white and colored patients separate entrances for white and colored patients and visitors, and such entrances shall be used by the race only for which they are prepared. Mississippi <br />72.<br />Prisons The warden shall see that the white convicts shall have separate apartments for both eating and sleeping from the negro convicts. Mississippi <br />73.<br />Education Separate free schools shall be established for the education of children of African descent; and it shall be unlawful for any colored child to attend any white school, or any white child to attend a colored school. Missouri <br />74.<br />Intermarriage All marriages between...white persons and negroes or white persons and Mongolians...are prohibited and declared absolutely void...No person having one-eighth part or more of negro blood shall be permitted to marry any white person, nor shall any white person be permitted to marry any negro or person having one-eighth part or more of negro blood. Missouri <br />75.<br />Education Separate rooms [shall] be provided for the teaching of pupils of African descent, and [when] said rooms are so provided, such pupils may not be admitted to the school rooms occupied and used by pupils of Caucasian or other descent. New Mexico <br />76.<br />Textbooks Books shall not be interchangeable between the white and colored schools, but shall continue to be used by the race first using them. North Carolina <br />77.<br />Libraries The state librarian is directed to fit up and maintain a separate place for the use of the colored people who may come to the library for the purpose of reading books or periodicals. North Carolina <br />78.<br />Militia The white and colored militia shall be separately enrolled, and shall never be compelled to serve in the same organization. No organization of colored troops shall be permitted where white troops are available, and while white permitted to be organized, colored troops shall be under the command of white officers. North Carolina <br />79.<br />Transportation The...Utilities Commission...is empowered and directed to require the establishment of separate waiting rooms at all stations for the white and colored races. North Carolina <br />80.<br />Teaching Any instructor who shall teach in any school, college or institution where members of the white and colored race are received and enrolled as pupils for instruction shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof, shall be fined in any sum not less than ten dollars ($10.00) nor more than fifty dollars ($50.00) for each offense. Oklahoma <br />81.<br />Fishing, Boating, and Bathing The [Conservation] Commission shall have the right to make segregation of the white and colored races as to the exercise of rights of fishing, boating and bathing. Oklahoma <br />82.<br />Mining The baths and lockers for the negroes shall be separate from the white race, but may be in the same building. Oklahoma <br />83.<br />Telephone Booths The Corporation Commission is hereby vested with power and authority to require telephone companies...to maintain separate booths for white and colored patrons when there is a demand for such separate booths. That the Corporation Commission shall determine the necessity for said separate booths only upon complaint of the people in the town and vicinity to be served after due hearing as now provided by law in other complaints filed with the Corporation Commission. Oklahoma <br />84.<br />Lunch Counters No persons, firms, or corporations, who or which furnish meals to passengers at station restaurants or station eating houses, in times limited by common carriers of said passengers, shall furnish said meals to white and colored passengers in the same room, or at the same table, or at the same counter. South Carolina <br />85.<br />Child Custody It shall be unlawful for any parent, relative, or other white person in this State, having the control or custody of any white child, by right of guardianship, natural or acquired, or otherwise, to dispose of, give or surrender such white child permanently into the custody, control, maintenance, or support, of a negro. South Carolina <br />86.<br />Libraries Any white person of such county may use the county free library under the rules and regulations prescribed by the commissioners court and may be entitled to all the privileges thereof. Said court shall make proper provision for the negroes of said county to be served through a separate branch or branches of the county free library, which shall be administered by [a] custodian of the negro race under the supervision of the county librarian. Texas <br />87.<br />Education [The County Board of Education] shall provide schools of two kinds; those for white children and those for colored children. Texas <br />88.<br />Theaters Every person...operating...any public hall, theatre, opera house, motion picture show or any place of public entertainment or public assemblage which is attended by both white and colored persons, shall separate the white race and the colored race and shall set apart and designate...certain seats therein to be occupied by white persons and a portion thereof , or certain seats therein, to be occupied by colored persons. Virginia <br />89.<br />Railroads The conductors or managers on all such railroads shall have power, and are hereby required, to assign to each white or colored passenger his or her respective car, coach or compartment. If the passenger fails to disclose his race, the conductor and managers, acting in good faith, shall be the sole judges of his race. Virginia <br />90.<br />Intermarriage All marriages of white persons with Negroes, Mulattos, Mongolians, or Malaya hereafter contracted in the State of Wyoming are and shall be illegal and void. Wyoming<br />91.<br />Argument I<br />Petition of 1780 by Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) (Negro) slaves for the abolition of slavery in Connecticut<br />Unto your Honner the govener and all the wise men of the State of Connecticut which it hath Plesed god to Permit to gather at Hartford unto you we the the Poor and opresed Negro Sarvents of this Town By and with the advice of Each other and By the Desier of all the Negro Sarvents in this State Do in a most humble maner Criy unto you for Liberty alltho we have Desiered this faver from your honners Time after Time yet we are Not Discuriged But Do Still intend to Beag this faver from Time to Time tho you Should not grant us our Desiers this Time - <br />We are all of us the Same mind as we was when we asked this advantige of your honners Last may that our marsters have no more Rite to make us Searve them then we have to make our Marsters Searve us and we have Resen to wonder that our Case has not Ben taken into Consideration So fare as to Grant us our Libertys But we must consider what the Book of Eceleisastes says at 8 Chapter & at the 11 varce Because Sentence aganst an Evel work is not Executed Speedily theirfore the hart of the Sons of men is fully Set in them to do Evel - and for this Reson we Think our Cause is Not Regarded and we Still must Say as Jeremiah Says in his Lamentations at the 5 Chapter & at the 5 varce <br />Our necks are under Persecution we Labour and have no rest - But we are in good hopes that your honners will Take Notis of our Case and Do unto us as you would be Glad that we Should Do unto you if we was in your Condishon and you in ours But it hath Plesed god to Place us in the Sitawaytion we are now in But we Pray to god that he would Send forth his Good Spirit into your harts and Remind you of your Duty and make you the Instermints of Binding up the Brokenharted and of Proclaiming Liberty to the Captives and the opening of the Prison to them that are Bound We ask your good Will to Look upon us and we Criy unto you in the words of Job at the 19 Chapter & at the 21 varce Have Pity upon me have Pity upon me o ye my frindes - But we Still Look unto god Who Pursarves Both the Servent and the marster for we Know that in the 140 Psalm at the 12 varces That we have a Sartin Promos viz. I Know that the Lord will maintain the Cause of the afflicted and the Right of the Poor and we think that it is time for us to Criy aloud for our Liberty for No Son of man will give his Sarvent his Time unless he Thinks that he Dos Roung in Keeping off him and So Considers that their is a wa Ppurnounced aganst those that Take a way their Neighbours Servise with wages and giveth him Not for his work Jeremiah at the 22 Chapter & at the 13 varce wo unto him that Buildeth his house By Unriteousness and without wages and giveth him Not for his work and when their is a man that will give his Searvent his Liberty we must think that he Considers what the word of God Says in the 34 Chapter and the 10 varces of the Book of Jeremiah viz. <br />Now when all the Princes and all the people which had Entered into the Covenent heard that Every one Should Let his maid Searvent and Every one his man Servent go free that None Should Serve themselves of them any more then they obeyed and Let them go and We wish that all our marsters would consider the word of God as Job Did and Consider the Cause of his man Servent and of his maid Servent when we Contend with our marsters But we Cant find Such men as will other give or Sell ous Liberty & we all Both young and old Do ask your Kind and good will toasist us in geting our freedom for we have indured the galling yok of Bondige Ever Sence we have Ben Brought from our own Country and I those of us that Was Born in this Cuntry have Ben under Bondage our hol lives untill now and their is a grat nomber of us which have been Brotup By Such I men as have Not Larnt us to Read the woord of God Neather have have They Lamt us the mening of the word of I God But have Keept us from the Knoledge of that Salvation which we have a Right to By Jesus Christ But we Think that if we have our Liberty we Shall have an opportunity to Larn the word of God and to Recive good to our Sols as well as our Bodyes and if we Could But injoy our Liberty we think that we Should Be in as Fare a way to make our Calling and Electtion Suer and By Gods Goodness have our Sols Saved from Eerlasting Damnation But we are keep from all favers Both Bodys and Sols But we Look unto that god which is as able to Save us as he is to Save our Marsters But we Depend upon the Blesings of god in making the gurenel asimbly the insterments of Seating us at Liberty from these men that I Now hold us as Servents - But if your honners Refuse to asist us in Releving us from our Marsters we Shall I have Reson to say that you [.?.] Do Not your duty as the word of God says in the Book of Isaiah at the 58 Chapter and 6 varse I To undo the hevy Burdens and to Leat the oppressed Go free and that I ye Brak Every yoke - and this is the Duty of all that have an oppertunity to Releve them that are in Disstrass I and if your honners forgit your Duty all men may say that our Roulars Bare the Sword in vain But if we Kant have our Desier dont think hard of us if By our marsters we say as David Did By his enemies Psalms the 109 and the 6 varce <br />Set thou a wicked man over him and I Let Satan Stand at his Right hand the 7 varc when he Shall Be I Judged Let him Be Condemned and Let his Prayer Become Sin I the 8 varce Let his Days Be few and Let another take his offsice I the 9 varce Let his Children Be fatherliss and his wife a widow the 10 varce Let his Children Be Continually vagabonds and Beg Let them Seek their Bread also out of their Desolate Places the 11 varce Let the Extortioner Catch all that he hath and Let the Stranger Spoil all his Labour the 12 varce Let thair Be none to Extend mercy unto him Neither Let their Be any to favour his fatherless Children I the 13 verce Let his Posterity Be Cut off and in the generation I folowing Let their Name Be Blotted out the 14 varce Let The iniquity of his fathers Be Remembered with the Lord and Let Not the Sin of his mother Be Blotted the 15 varce Let them Be Before the Lord Continually that he may Cut off the memory of them from the Earth the 16 varce Because that he Remembered not to Shew marcy But Perscuted the Poor and nedy I man. And Surr we hope that you will Remember the Poor and oppresed negro men in the State which you are Chosen to Do Justice in So we are abliged to Lement Our Case as in Lamentations at the 5 chapter and 5 varce Our Necks are under Persecution we Labour and have no Rest.<br />92.<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) having the significant that here Oct 1780." slaves are gaining "legal personality," which is to say that they can represent their interests in terms of law, <br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) petition is written in a reasonably good hand by a slave who consulted a King James version of the Bible, and found in Governor Trumbull's papers leads “the Governor” never bothered to forward it to the Assembly on behalf of the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans.<br />93.<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) herein first show before the “Honorable Justice” The Timetable of World Legal History:<br />2350 BC: Urukagina's Code<br />This code has never been discovered but it is mentioned in other documents as a consolidation of existing "ordinances" or laws laid down by Mesopotamian kings. An administrative reform document was discovered which showed that citizens were allowed to know why certain actions were punished. It was also harsh by modern standards. Thieves and adulteresses were to be stoned to death with stones inscribed with the name of their crime. The code confirmed that the "king was appointed by the gods".<br />2050 BC: Ur-Nammu's Code<br />The earliest known written legal code of which a copy has been found, albeit a copy in such poor shape that only five articles can be deciphered. Archaeological evidence shows that it was supported by an advanced legal system which included specialized judges, the giving of testimony under oath, the proper form of judicial decisions and the ability of the judges to order that damages be paid to a victim by the guilty party. The Code allowed for the dismissal of corrupt men, protection for the poor and a punishment system where the punishment is proportionate to the crime. Although it is called "Ur-Nammu's Code, historians generally agree that it was written by his son Shugli.<br />1850 BC: The Earliest Known Legal Decision<br />A clay tablet reveals the case, in 1850BC, of the murder of a temple employee by three men. The victim's wife knew of the murder but remained silent. Eventually, the crime came to light and the men and woman were charged with murder. Nine witnesses testified against the men and woman and asked for the death penalty for all four. But the wife had two witnesses which told the court that she had been abused by her husband, that she was not part of the murder and that she was even worse off after her husband's death. The men were executed in front of the victim's house but the woman was spared.<br />1700 BC: Hammurabi's Code<br />This Babylonian king came to power in 1750 BC. Under his rule, a code of laws was developed and carved on a huge rock column. The expression "an eye for an eye" has come to symbolize the principle behind Hammurabi's code. It contains 282 clauses regulating a vast array of obligations, professions and rights including commerce, slavery, marriage, theft and debts. The punishments are, by modern standards, barbaric. The punishment for theft was the cutting off of a finger or a hand. A man's lower lip was cut off if he kissed a married woman. Defamation was punished by cutting out the tongue. If a house collapses because the builder did not make it strong enough, killing the owner, the builder was put to death. If the owner's son died, then the builder's son was executed.<br />1300 BC: The Ten Commandments<br />According to the Bible, it was in approximately 1300 BC that Moses received a list of ten laws directly from God. These laws were known as the Ten Commandments and were transcribed as part of the Book of Moses, which later became part of the Bible. Many of the Ten Commandments continue in the form of modern laws such as "thou shalt not kill" (modern society severely punishes the crime of murder), "thou shalt not commit adultery" (modern society allows a divorce on this grounds) and "thou shalt not steal" (modern society punishes theft as a crime). The Bible chapter that contains the Ten Commandments (Exodus) follows the recitation of the Commandments with a complete set of legal rules, which are based on the "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" legal philosophy of Hammurabi's Code. Click here to read the actual text of the Ten Commandments in the WWLIA LAW Museum Archives section.<br />1280 BC to 880 BC: The Laws of Manu<br />It has not yet been possible to pinpoint exactly when India's great Laws of Manu were written. The Laws were a written compilation of known legal rules which had been passed on from generation to generation. It formed the basis of the caste system in India, where people were classified by their social standing and regulated almost all facets of India's society from contracts to criminal law. The Laws of Manu used punishment sparingly and only as a last resort and rarely sadistic. Amputation, though, was a possible sentence. The members of the higher castes were punished more severely than those of the lower castes.<br />621 BC: Draco's Law<br />This Greek citizen was chosen to write a code of law for Athens (Greece). The penalty for many offences was death; so severe, that the word "draconian" comes from his name and has come to mean, in the English language, an unreasonably harsh law. His laws were the first written laws of Greece. These laws introduced the state's exclusive role in punishing persons accused of crime, instead of relying on private justice. The citizens adored Draco and upon entering an auditorium one day to attend a reception in his honour, the citizens of Athens showered him with their hats and cloaks as was their customary way to show appreciation. By the time they dug him out from under the clothing, he had been smothered to death.<br />600 BC: Lycergus' Law<br />This King of Sparta (southern Greece) was a renowned lawgiver. His laws were never written, just transmitted orally and were designed to support the military vocation of Sparta. It held that women had a duty to have children and that children born with deformity were killed. Children became wards of Sparta at the age of seven to prepare them for military duty. The greatest crime of all was retreat in battle. The Laws of Lycergus controlled virtually every aspect of the lives of citizens of Sparta.<br />550 BC: Solon's Laws<br />Solon was an Athenian statesman and lawmaker. He further refined Draco's laws and is credited with "democratizing" justice by making the courts more accessible to citizens.<br />536 BC: The Book of Punishments<br />A legal book printed in China which limited the ways to punish someone where they had been convicted of a serious crime. They included tattooing, cutting off of the nose, castration, feet amputation and death.<br />450 BC: The Twelve Tables<br />Ten Roman men were given wide powers to write the laws that were to govern Romans. They came up with ten laws to which two were later added. These laws are considered to form the foundation of all modern public and private law. They promoted the organization of public prosecution of crimes and instituted a system whereby injured parties could seek compensation from their aggressors. More importantly, they protected the lower class (plebes) from the legal abuses of the ruling class (the patricians) especially in the enforcement of debts. From that point on, a basic principle of Roman law is that the law must be written and justice cannot be left in the hands of judges alone to interpret. It also prohibited inter-class marriages, seriously punished theft and gave fathers rights of life or death over his sons. The Twelve Tables also punished the misuse of magic! Written on wood and bronze tablets, the Twelve Tables survived almost 1000 years until destroyed by invading gauls in 390.<br />350 BC (approximately): The Chinese Code of Li k'vei<br />The first Chinese imperial code of laws dealt with theft, robbery, prison, arrest and general rules. It served as a model for the T'ang Code.<br />399BC: The Trial of Socrates<br />Socrates was an Athenian philosopher. Socrates was not religious and preached logic. When Athens lost the Peloponnesian Wars, conservative Athenians looked for a scapegoat. Three citizens brought an accusation against the 70-year old popular philosopher for allegedly corrupting the youth and for not believing in the gods. He was tried before a jury of 501 citizens that found him guilty on a vote of 281-220. When asked to speak on the proposed sentence, Socrates mocked the jurors and they replied, 361-140, with a sentence of death. Socrates' promoted "conscience" and his death increased interest in his life and teachings.<br />529: Justinian's Code<br />This Emperor of Byzantine is best remembered for his codification of Roman Law in a series of books called Corpus Juris Civilis. His collection served as an important basis for law in contemporary society, and was inspired by logic-based Greek legal principles. Many legal maxims still in use today are derived from Justinian's Code. His work inspired the modern concept and, indeed, the very spelling of "justice". This Roman Code survived as the many parts of Germany until 1900 and important traces of it can be found in the law of Italy, Scotland, South Africa and Quebec. Roman law formed the base of civil law, one of the two main legal systems to govern modern society in the Western civilization (the other being English common law). A quote: "The things which are common to all (and not capable of being owned) are: the air, running water, the sea and the seashores."<br />604: The Seventeen Article Constitution of Japan<br />Written by a Japanese prince regent, the Constitution shaped morality and law in Japan, a country which had just begun to develop and become literate. Some examples of its paternalistic clauses are: "peace and harmony should be respected because they are very important for intergroup relations"; "There are very few evil men. If we teach them (the Buddha beliefs), they may become obedient"; "equality, speediness and integrity should be maintained in court procedures" and "the basic philosophy in all matters should be "against privacy" and "toward public benefit". In it, one can observe that the emphasis of "Oriental law" which seeks to prevent disputes, whereas the "Western law" seeks to resolve disputes.<br />653: T'ang Code<br />The territory which is now China was, since time immemorial, occupied by feuding kingdoms. It was not until 221 BC that the king of "Ch'in" managed to defeat the kings of the other 6 kingdoms and unite China. After 400 years of unification, the Empire developed a Code of Law called the T'sang Code, which listed crimes and their punishment in 501 articles. The Code revised earlier existing Chinese codes and standardized procedures. For examples, there were only two ways to perform capital punishment on a convicted criminal: beheading or hanging.<br />700: Fingerprinting Is Invented<br />Fingerprinting was in use by this time in China as a means of identifying people.<br />1100: First Law School<br />In medieval Italy, students of law would hire a teacher to teach them Roman Law, especially Justinian's Code Corpus Juris. One teacher, known as Irnerius was particularly popular and students began to flock to him from all over Europe. He taught in Bologna and the surge of students meant that he had to hire other teachers to form the world's first law school. By 1150, his law school had over 10,000 students and contributed to the revival of the Corpus Juris and the spread of Roman law throughout Europe!<br />1215: Magna Carta<br />At Runneymede, England, on June 15, 1215, King John of England signed the Magna Carta in which he conceded a number of legal rights to his barons and to the people. In order to finance his foreign wars, King John had taxed abusively. His Barons threatened rebellion and coerced the King into committing to rudimentary judicial guarantees such as the freedom of the church, fair taxation, controls over imprisonment (habeas corpus) and the right to all merchants to come and go, freely, except in time of war. The Magna Carta had 61 clauses the most important of which may have been #39: "No freeman shall be captured or imprisoned ... except by lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the land". It was the first time a king allowed that even he could be compelled to observe a law or the barons were allowed to "distrain and distress him in every possible way", just short of a legal right to rebellion. Once sworn to the document, letters were sent to all sheriffs ordering them to read the Charter aloud in public. It has been called the "blueprint of English common law" and was even recently pleaded in a English case. Click here to read the entire text of the Magna Carta in the LAW Museum Archives.<br />1306: The Trial of Scotsman William Wallace<br />Click here to read the full text of "The Trial of Scotsman William Wallace".<br />1535: The Trial of Sir Thomas More<br />Click here to read the full text of "The Trial of Sir Thomas More".<br />1689: The English Bill of Rights<br />This bill was a precursor to the American Bill of Rights, and set out strict limits on the Royal Family's legal prerogatives such as a prohibition against arbitrary suspension of Parliament's laws. More importantly, it limited the right to raise money through taxation to Parliament. Click here to read the article (including the full text) on "The 1689 Bill of Rights".<br />1692: The Salem Witch Trials<br />In 1692, in the town of Salem, Massachusetts, USA, a group of young women accused several other women of practising withcraft or worhip of the Devil. The accusations turned into a judicial frenzy and over 300 people were acused of witchcraft, of which 20 were executed including a priest. The extremity of the penalty turned many against the prosecution of withcraft. There would be no more witchcraft trials in New England.<br />1740: South Carolina Slave Code<br />This infamous legislation regulated the use of slaves and became the model for slavery in other states, until repealed as an effect of the American Civil War. "All Negroes, Indians ... and all their offspring ... shall be and are hereby declared to be and remain forever hereafter slaves; and shall be deemed ... to be chattels personal in the hands of their owners."<br />1765: Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England<br />This British barrister set about writing down the entire English law in a 4-volume set, in easy-to-read English, thus making the law suddenly accessible to the common man. His research also made the book a must-read for lawyers and law students alike. It was re-published many times. Through it, the English law was readily imported to the British colonies and in fact it is said that Blackstone's Commentaries was the law in the American colonies for the first century of American independence. The Commentaries also allows us to witness the exact state of British law at that time on such things as the total legal submission of a wife to her husband, as was then considered natural law.<br />1776: The American Declaration of Independence<br />"We the people," starts the Declaration of Independence proclaimed on July 4, 1776. The Declaration was a statement to the effect that "all political connection between (the United Colonies) and the State of Great Britain is and ought to be dissolved" and that a new state, the United States, was started. It remains a remarkable legal document in that it is the first time a government has rebuked the medieval theory that certain people possessed by right the power to rule others. "All men are created equal,"rings the declaration, and have "unalienable rights that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their powers from the consent of the governed." (Click here to read the Declaration of Independence.)<br />1787: The Constitution of the United States of America<br />The 7 articles of the American Constitution were signed in Philadelphia in 1787 and formed the basis of the first republican government in the world. The Constitution defined the institutions of government and the powers of each institution, carefully carving out the duties of the executive, legislative and judicial branches. The Constitution also declared that it was paramount to any other law, whether federal or state, and it would override any other inconsistent law. The American Constitution served as a model for the constitutions of many nations upon attaining independence or becoming democracies.<br />1788: Through the Operation of Penal Law, A Country Is Formed<br />Sydney was the site of the first British settlement on Australia, which had been designated as a prime location as a British penal colony. For fifty years, Britain sent its worst men, who were quickly chained into work gangs and put to building roads and bridges. By 1821, there were 30,000 British settlers in the British commonwealth, of which 75% were convicts.<br />1791: The American Bill of Rights<br />With the ink barely dry on the Constitution (signed only four years earlier), American statesmen amended their supreme law by declaring the rights of free speech, freedom of the press and of religion, a right to trial by one's peers (jury), and protection against "cruel and unusual punishment" or unreasonable searches or seizures. The ten amendments of Bill of Rights became known as the First to Tenth Amendment(s) respectively. The Bill of Rights influenced many modern charters or bills of rights around the world.<br />1803: Marbury versus Madison<br />In this case, the Supreme Court upheld the supremacy of the Constitution and stated unequivocally that it had the power to strike down actions taken by American federal or state legislative bodies which, in its opinion, offended the Constitution. This has come to be known as the power of "judicial review". This case is considered by the legal profession to be the most important milestone in the history of American law since the Constitution.<br />1804: Napoleonic Code<br />Under the government of Napoleon, France adopted a comprehensive code of law in 1804 which enshrined many of the victories obtained during the Revolution such as individual liberty, equality before the law and the lay character of the state. The Code also incorporated most parts of Roman law. The Code became a model for civil law systems such as Quebec, California and Louisiana. Perhaps the most important aspect of the Code was the fact that the law was written (as opposed to judge-made) and in a non-technical style and thus more accessible to the public. The Code regulated much of private law matters such as property, wills, contracts, liability and obligations. Many of its parts are traceable to Roman law. The French Code inspired similar civil codes in the Canadian Province of Quebec (1865), Germany (1900) and Switzerland (1907)<br />1864: The Geneva Convention<br />This agreement was designed to provide for minimal human rights in time of war such as the protection of military medical personnel and for the humane treatment of the wounded. It was later supplemented by a Prisoner of War Convention. Although frequently ignored in military operations, this documents remains an important legal document which, for the first time ever, sets out rudimentary standards of human decency during war.<br />1865: The Thirteenth Amendment<br />By this change to the American Constitution, slavery was abolished in the USA.<br />1945-46: The Nuremberg War Crimes Trial<br />A special panel of eight judges convened in this German town to try Nazi officers for crimes against peace, crimes against humanity and war crimes committed during World War II. The judges came from the USA, Great Britain, France and the Soviet Union. Twenty-four Nazis were tried and twelve received death penalties (although one defendant, Hermann Göring, committed suicide hours before his execution). This trial was important as it showed that even in times of war, basic moral standards apply in spite of military law principles which oblige a subordinate officer to obey orders. "The true test," wrote the Tribunal, "is not the existence of the (superior) order but whether moral choice (in executing it) was in fact possible". The crimes included torture, deportation, persecution and mass extermination.<br />1948: The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)<br />The GATT was developed by the United Nations and has served as a catalyst for the lifting of legal barriers against the free movement of goods, services and people. Now under the auspices of the World Trade Organization, the implementation of GATT by almost all countries is causing commercial law interplay between differing legal systems and, in most cases, providing impetus for those legal systems to move towards similarity and compatibility. The GATT also shows a new emphasis of the development of law in the world: from military and basic rights to trade and economic matters.<br />94.<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African Americans respectfully assert before the “Honorable Justice” the Defendant (The United States of America) "We the people," starts the Declaration of Independence proclaimed on July 4, 1776.<br />95. <br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African Americans respectfully assert furtherance’s before the “Honorable Justice” Defendant(s) (The United States of America) Abolishes slavery and involuntary servitude, against the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) on December 6, 1865 which “slavery” was placed in to action by said Defendant back during the year 1619<br />(246) Years the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans held against their peace, dignity and will for Slavery by the Defendant (The United States of America) herein under conformity of all “slave codes” as described in paragraph (15) above which time thereafter said defendant (The United States of America)Established instead of freedom for (Negros) in 1865 <br />Moreover said defendant establish “Black Codes” against the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) as described in paragraph (23) – (30) above while all of the comforts of the Defendant Constitution provisions being amendments 1-13 still do not pertain to the Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) under new established “Black code” restriction as described by the Black Codes them self.<br />96. <br />Defendant(s) herein (The United States of America) already having secure sinfully in institute of their “iron brand” on (White supremacy) being well established for (246) years to date from 1619-1865<br />Include but not limited placement of crimes for (among other things) (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) herein obtain learning to write and having reading skills in the (246) past years.<br />97.<br />Now said Defendant (The United States of America) having once again secure sinfully in the instituted “Black Codes” to insure said Defendant (White Supremacy) in the time frame of 1865 by Co-Defendant (President Andrew Johnson)<br />To aid in said Defendant (The United States of America) civil/criminal conspiracy by further “hinder and regulate” Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) ability to (In among other things) obtain possession of “simple” learning to write and reading skills for (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) herein self preserve and equal advancement within the Defendant (The United States of America) in 1865.<br />98.<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) assert respectfully before the “Honorable Justice” Defendant herein (The United States of America) 1865 “Black Codes” intention, goal, aim, objective, meaning at the time of draft and blueprint against the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African Americans herein was fully design in “language and content” for the full “defamation purpose” intent to produce the effected concentration on inferior, lesser value, low-grade, substandard second –rate, shoddy, imperfect quality of all of the human (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Blacks African Americans living within the Defendant (The United States of America) during the precise time frame in 1865.<br />99.<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African Americans herein assert and strongly state upright, admirable, and honorable before the “Honorable Justice” Defendant herein (The United States of America)who did in all facts, status, state of affairs, position, circumstances and conditions after defendant imposed “Slave codes” capitol criminal institution situation and the release into freedom of the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African Americans herein;<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African Americans herein assert and strongly state upright, admirable, and honorable before the “Honorable Justice” Said described defendant herein (The United States of America) <br />And Co-Defendant President Andrew Johnson blueprint, design and executed continue a well self preserved (White Supremacy) destructed (RICO) pattern and practices to destroy all (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) herein “civil reputation” by the creation of an “defamation environment” all of the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African Americans having to “now endure” at the hand of the Defendant (The United States of America) <br />Dishonorable as before “only under the new disguise malice” of limited freedom such as “Black Codes” being legal declare, provide regulations, and upon enforce punishment for violations<br /> Notwithstanding all (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans facing wrongful death execution for exercising an attempt at voting rights in the year of 1865 within the Defendant (The United State of America).<br />100.<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans herein assert before the “Honorable Justice” the first “comprehended defamatory and injurious statements” made in a public manner against the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans herein was in fact published by said Defendant (The United States of America) <br />And Co-Defendant (President Andrew Johnson) “Black Codes” declared that an action could be brought up against the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans herein under this defamatory rule for continue control over all of the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) herein and assert fully Defendant (The United States of America) “White Supremacy”.<br />101.<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans herein assert before the “Honorable Justice” the Defendant (The United States of America) and the Co-defendant (President Andrew Johnson) at the expensive of the Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) life, peace, will, and dignity under blue printed defamatory “Black Codes” Defendant herein assurance continue supply of inexpensive (Negro) Plaintiff(s) and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans herein as agricultural labor, and maintain Defendant herein (The United States of America) (White) dominated hierarchy.<br />102.<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans herein assert before the “Honorable Justice” in addition said Defendant (The United States of America) and the Co-defendant (President Andrew Johnson) herein, being actual (Founder of Ku Klux Klan) a paramilitary organization with a well-established records within the Defendant (The United States of America) of engaging in complete terrorism against the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) herein,<br />103.<br /> The Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans herein respectfully assert before the “Honorable Justice” such paramilitary organization as the (KKK) under the “direction” of the Co-Defendant (President Andrew Johnson) at the peace, will, dignity and expensive of the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American herein already damaged reputation by the infamous “Black Codes” <br />Published defamatory among other things (Life Threaten election poster, pamphlets within the Defendant (The United States of America) especially dealing with terrorizing (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans votes<br />Being fullydesigned to be in full view throughout public to the effect that the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) is of immoral, wicked, morally wrong outlandish and terrifying human life creature being,<br /> Furtherance such defamatory practices and pattern by all said described Defendant(s) above is moral sanction and justify in the massive hanging and lynching of the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans herein.<br />104.<br /> Argument II<br />Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans herein respectfully assert before the “Honorable Justice” Defendant herein (The United States of America) defamatory pattern and practices continue on ward by said described defendant institution of “Jim Crow Laws” as described in paragraph (43) above <br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African Americans herein state exactly between the precise time frame of 1870 and 1884, eleven of the Defendant (The United States of America) southern states legally banned miscegenation, or interracial marriages.<br />105.<br /> (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African Americans herein state exactly the Defendant (The United States of America) legal imposed bans were the "ultimate segregation laws" in that they clearly spelled out the idea that (whites) were superior to all (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) black African Americans herein<br /> And that any mixing of the two threatened Defendant (The United States of America) “White Status” and the “purity” of the “White Race” within the defendant (The United States of America). <br />106.<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans herein respectfully with simplicity and ease assert before the “Honorable Justice” numerous (RICO) defamatory pattern and practices were instituted by the said described defendant herein;<br />In that among other things the Defendant (The United States of America) Schools by “blue print and devise” executed under “Jim Crow” segregation laws of the defendant herein appeared on the books in nearly every defendant (The United States of America) southern state prior to 1888, beginning with namely Tennessee and Arkansas in 1866. <br />Virginia erected in 1869 a constitutional ban against blacks and whites attending the same schools, followed by Tennessee in 1870, Alabama and North Carolina in 1875, Texas in 1876, Georgia in 1877, and Florida in 1885. Arkansas and Mississippi passed school segregation statutes in 1873 and 1878.<br />107.<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans herein assert before the “Honorable Justice” the Defendant (The United States of America) “Jim Crow Laws” wrongfully libel and label (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans conduct before public as being “ban- mannered”, “discourteous”,” impolite”, “vulgar”, “disrespectful” and straightforwardness to the exact point and effect all (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) are very “foul creatures”;<br />108.<br /> Thus required the said Defendant herein (The United States of America) to supply such a defamatory (RICO) “pattern and practices” in the implementation in all of the “Jim Crow Laws” as some being described in paragraph (45) above to be fully direct, executed against all of the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans herein from a precise time frame 1866 herein well into and beyond the time frame of 1965 over 100 years defendant (The United States of America) <br />III “Jim Crow defamatory civil and criminal Law phase” being organization, established, introduce, set up, emplaced, instituted and foundation against the peace, will, and dignity of all of the described (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans herein.<br />109.<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African American herein assert before the “Honorable Justice” the Defendant (The United States of America) usage of “defamation device” against the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans herein <br />Through said defendant (The United States of America) “infusion combination cocktail blend” to incite pure “ignorance”,” “racism”, and “violence” among the (White Supremacy) race against the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans herein<br /> Devised for the Defendant (The United States of America) prolong self-interest to be sustain and spread racial divisions through defamatory pattern and practices through “Jim Crow Laws” of the Defendant (The United States of America)<br />110.<br />Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) respectfully assert before the “Honorable Justice” By 1900, Defendant herein (The United States of America new “Jim Crow laws” and Defendant (The United States of America) old (Slavery) customs in the North and the South states of the Defendant,<br /> (The United States of America) had created a complete “segregated hostile society” that used “defamatory tactic” to fully condemn the Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans herein (Negro) race to “second-class citizenship”.<br />111.<br />Argument III<br />Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans herein respectfully assert before the “Honorable Justice” Defendant herein (The United States of America) defamatory pattern and practices continue on ward by said described defendant fight over (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Blacks Africans Americans civil rights issue. <br />112.<br />The (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) herein respectfully assert before the “Honorable Justice” Defendant (The United States of America) race for governor of Ohio in 1867. Allen Granbery Thurman’s campaign included the promise of barring all (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American Black citizens from voting. He narrowly lost to future Co-Defendant President Rutherford B. Hayes.<br />113.<br />The (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African American herein respectfully assert before the “Honorable Justice” Defendant (The United States of America) Denying (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) black men the right to vote through legal defamatory maneuvering and violence was a first step in taking away the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans civil rights. <br />114.<br />The (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African American herein respectfully assert further before the “Honorable Justice” Beginning in the 1890s, Defendant (The United States of America)southern states enacted literacy tests, poll taxes, elaborate registration systems, and eventually whites-only Democratic Party primaries to exclude (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) black African Americans voters. <br />115.<br />The (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African American herein respectfully assert further the Defendant (The United States of America) defamatory vote laws against the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) proved very effective.<br /> In Defendant Mississippi, fewer than 9,000 of the 147,000 voting-age (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African Americans were registered after 1890. <br />In Louisiana, where more than 130,000 (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans voters had been registered in 1896, the number had plummeted to 1,342 by 1904. <br />116.<br />Argument IV<br />(Negro)Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans herein respectfully assert before the “Honorable Justice” Defendant herein (The United States of America) defamatory pattern and practices continue on ward by said described defendant (The United States of America) states Both Indiana (1816) and Illinois (1818) abolished slavery by their constitutions. <br />However both followed the state of Ohio policy of trying to prevent (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) black African Americans immigration by passing laws of the Defendant (The United States of America) requiring (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) black African Americans <br />Who moved into the said state above of the Defendant (The United States of America) to produce legal documents verifying that (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans were free and further posting bond to guarantee the Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans were of “good behavior”.<br />117.<br />Argument V<br />(Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans herein assert before the Honorable Justice” (In the early to mid-1800's) "The overwhelming majority of white northerners within the Defendant (The United States of America)<br />Care little about the welfare of the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) African American slaves, and treated (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) blacks African Americans who lived among (White Citizens) with extreme contempt, ridicule, discrimination and sometimes violence.<br />118.<br />The Defendant (The United States of America) under the imposed “Black Codes” in 1865 hold that all of the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans reputation, standing, and character in the Defendant (The United States of America) public <br />Being fully contempt, at a complete state of ridicule by impeaching the “actual Honesty of the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans herein ability from testifying “Honesty” against a “Whiteman” in a Court of Law.<br />119.<br />The (Negro) Plaintiff African American herein (Hamilton II) his entire (Negro) family and all of the (Negro) Plaintiff(s)African Americans herein embrace, become accustomed to, quite familiarize, and accommodate to the Defendant (The United States of America) “Slave Codes” sound underlayment foundation <br />In providing the actual defamatory start of defendant (The United States of America) pattern and practices against the (Negro) Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans race since 1619 well into the year of our lord 2011.<br />120.<br /> Plaintiff and Plaintiff(s) Black African Americans herein respectfully complimentary assert on behalf of Defendant herein (The United States of America) being fully in this time frame, 2011 safe and sound, <br />Secure, protected, assured, and quite stable in its own self preserved “blueprint establishment” of “Absolute White Supremacy” and “Absolute Immunity” for “White Supremacy” on behalf of the said described defendan

×