Group items tagged

These elementary principles establish the government's obligation to provide medical care for those whom it is punishing by incarceration. An inmate must rely on prison authorities to treat his medical needs; if the authorities fail to do so, those needs will not be met. In the worst cases, such a failure may actually produce physical "torture or a lingering death," In re Kemmler, supra, the evils of most immediate concern to the drafters of the Amendment. In less serious cases, denial of medical care may result in pain and suffering which no one suggests would serve any penological purpose. Cf. Gregg v. Georgia, supra, at 173, 96 S.Ct. at 2924-25 (joint opinion). The infliction of such unnecessary suffering is inconsistent with contemporary standards of decency as manifested in modern legislation8 codifying the commonlaw view that "(i)t is but just that the public be required to care for the prisoner, who cannot by reason of the deprivation of his liberty, care for himself."9

Officials indifference to Lee Franks request for protection. The killer has stalked Lee almost three years without any protection.

", concluding that the Navarros failed to offer any evidence of a County policy or custom of treating domestic violence 911 calls differently from non-domestic violence 911 calls, nor any evidence of a County policy or custom of depriving residents in minority neighborhoods of equal police protection, nor any evidence of the Sheriff's deliberate or conscious indifference to the rights of abused women or residents in minority neighborhoods. 2 The Navarros now appeal."

About GPO | Newsroom/Media | Congressional Relations | Inspector General | Careers | Contact | askGPO Home | Customers | Vendors | Libraries FDsys - GPO Access Search Government Publications Browse Government Publications About Government Publications Search on GPO Access -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Narrow Your Search Collection Congressional Record (122) Congressional Hearings (79) Congressional Bills (64) See More... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date Published 1999 (57) May (10) 27 (4) 26 (2) 19 (2) 20 (1) 18 (1) December (10) 07 (10) July (8) 29 (3) 26 (2) 21 (2) 01 (1) June (6) 14 (3) 15 (2) 16 (1) January (6) 19 (5) 06 (1) August (5) 04 (3) 05 (2) March (3) 30 (1) 25 (1) 24 (1) September (3) 24 (1) 15 (1) 14 (1) November (2) 04 (2) April (2) 29 (1) 28 (1) February (1) 24 (1) October (1) 05 (1) 2007 (53) December (29) 31 (27) 12 (1) 18 (1) September (7) 30 (4) 25 (2) 06 (1) January (4) 02 (1) 04 (1) 10 (1) 17 (1) November (3) 01 (1) 06 (1) 15 (1) May (3) 25 (1) 23 (1) 21 (1) February (2) 06 (1) 08 (1) July (2) 31 (1) 12 (1) April (1) 17 (1) March (1) 13 (1) August (1) 09 (1) 2003 (47) December (10) 31 (9) 12 (1) November (8) 25 (2) 20 (1) 18 (1) 12 (1) 04 (1) 03 (1) 01 (1) July (6) 31 (1) 21 (1) 11 (1) 10 (1) 08 (1) 01 (1) October (5) 30 (3) 21 (2) March (5) 04 (2) 19 (1) 18 (1) 06 (1) June (4) 30 (1) 12 (1) 09 (1) 04 (1) January (3) 29 (1) 15 (1) 07 (1) May (2) 22 (2) September (2) 30 (1) 03 (1) April (1) 25 (1) August (1) 21 (1) See More... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Government Author Congress (427) House of Representatives (83) Senate (78) See More... -------------------------

This is Google's cache of http://home.earthlink.net/~malfeasance/id23.html. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Jun 22, 2010 22:26:17 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more Text-only versionThese terms only appear in links pointing to this page: http www vsb org profguides actions_jul06 dec06 html Citizens' Demand For An Investigation of Criminal Conspiracy by Beltway Attorneys and Judges Ib. Affidavit in Support of Criminal Complaint for Conspiracy Home | Letter to Congress on the Denial of the Right to Impartial Judicial Review of Misprision of a Felony | Our Purpose | Aug. 28, 2009 Letters to Preseident Obama and Gov. Kaine to Direct Response to Petition for Cert. | U.S. Supreme Court Petition for Cert. to DC Circuit to Oppose Disbarment based on VSBDB Void Order | I. Transmittal Letter to Federal Criminal Complaint Filed in the District of Columbia | Ia. D.C. CRIMINAL COMPLAINT FOR CONSPIRACY BY JUDGES, GOVERNMENT AND BELTWAY LOBBYIST/ATTORNEYS | Ib. Affidavit in Support of Criminal Complaint for Conspiracy | Ic. MEMO IN SUPPORT OF COMPLAINT TO INDICT JUDGES FOR CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY DEPRIVING FATHER OF RIGHTS | II. Transmittal Letter to Federal Criminal Complaint filed E.D. of Virgina | III. Transmittal Letter to Federal Criminal Complaint In Pennsylvania for Misprision of a Felony | IV. Transmittal Letter Federal Criminal Complaint Filed in Colorado for Obstruction of Justice. | V. TRANSMITTAL LETTER TO CRIMINAL COMPLAINT FOR JUDGES CABRANES ET AL. VIOLATING VOID ORDER DOCTRINE | Becoming a Member | Contact Us | Calendar of Events | Members Page | Newsletter | Links United States District Court District of Columbia ________________________________________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. John G. Roberts, et al., ________________________________________________) AFFIDAVIT OF PROBABLE CAUSE IN SUPPORT OF CRIMINAL COMPLAINT I. INTRODUCTION 1. I am a Citizen

Constitutional basis for legislation Congress derived its power to pass the Sherman Act through its constitutional authority to regulate interstate commerce. Therefore, Federal courts only have jurisdiction to apply the Act to conduct that restrains or substantially affects either interstate commerce or trade within the District of Columbia. This requires the plaintiff must show that the conduct occurred during the flow of interstate commerce or had an appreciable effect on some activity that occurs during interstate commerce. [edit] Elements A Section 1 violation has three elements:[16] An agreement which unreasonably restrains competition and which affects interstate commerce.

For stare decisis to be effective, each jurisdiction must have one highest court to declare what the law is in a precedent-setting case. The U.S. Supreme Court and the state supreme courts serve as precedential bodies, resolving conflicting interpretations of law or dealing with issues of first impression. Whatever these courts decide becomes judicial precedent

Prima Facia- So far blocked in court