Browsed by
Tag: for civil

civil actions filed on case #1101948CFA// I have now comfirmed through back ground this case is a misdemeiner and I was guilty for nothing more then defending my self ?>

civil actions filed on case #1101948CFA// I have now comfirmed through back ground this case is a misdemeiner and I was guilty for nothing more then defending my self

2016-03-25-12-20-55-1This be the case of which all my civil actions are filed against . There is testimony of alleged victim’s wife stating I had her husband In a head lock choking him. There’s testimony of alleged victims father in-law starting I beat him in the head repeatedly with my fist. Truth is the alleged victim was the aggressive party of this case and I held him down with one hand until the alleged victim was exhausted and gave up attempts to fight. You will also read in my book the alleged victim’s statements in depositions that Gerald did nothing but subdue me, in other words meaning ( I detained him till he could not fight anymore ) In other words I defended myself. Three statements against me with no similarities at all. For information on this case to be filed by the state is insane. I prevented the attacker from harming me, apparently the state thinks I should accept bodily from the aggressor before I can defend myself. As I said in my book” If this was a gun fight in the wild west I would have to be shot first before I could shoot him “. Now these papers above are from a back ground check for employment and these papers clearly state I was convicted of a felony , the only thing true on these papers is the sentencing of this case ( court cost ) that’s it, I was convicted of a misdemeanor and notice there is no document on the nine months and five days I spent in jail. It was just ruled recently in the Supreme Court of America that upon proving your innocence that the one year statute of limitations on habeas corpus is lifted , this case is not over. The contents of this paper work is without a doubt defamation of character.

Last week, in a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court decided McQuiggin v. Perkins.*  The Court held that a Schlup gateway “actual innocence” showing can overcome the one-year statute of limitations time bar. Ginsburg wrote the (nice) majority opinion and Scalia wrote the (troubling) dissent.