Category Archives: Immunity

Speculation on Non-Judicial Immunity

Contradiction? [courtesy Google Images]

[courtesy Google Images]

The following email got me thinking:


Dear Mr. Adask ……………..

I sent the letter to you below back on 22 December 2014 and have been following your emails since then and so far no mention of the issue I presented.  Since then I have gone through the Federal District Court System and the Federal Circuit Court System and have identified eleven corrupt members of the judiciary. Now I am preparing a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court on the issue of whether a judge who breaks the law is immune from damages liability if in breaking settled law he observes otherwise correct procedural guidelines. I believe the absurdity of that proposition to be absolutely dumbfounding!

So now we will see what the SCT has to say. I entertain no high expectation even though the SCT made it clear in Stump v. Sparkman that judges who perform non-judicial acts shed their immunity!

It’s serious stuff, Mr. Adask. I just hope the book I’m writing about this increasingly screwed up legal system of ours will effect some mid-course correction!

Read the rest of this entry »


Posted by on June 14, 2015 in Administrative Law, Immunity


Tags: , , , ,


Gang Wars [courtesy Google Images]

Gang Wars:  Two Gangs Face Off
[courtesy Google Images]

I’m going to start this article with a definition:  the term “gangsters” signifies a minority-group of people who believe they are so “special” that they are not subject to the law that applies to the majority.  These “gangsters” often justify their exemption to the law of the majority based on claims of racism, injustice, poverty, or even necessity as in “my baby momma hungry, so I steal sumpin’.”

If it’s true that “gangsters” are minority groups who feel entitled and justified to be exempt from the law of the majority, aren’t the police, in particular, and government in general also “gangsters”?

Don’t the police enjoy immunities from legal liabilities that would get most people thrown in the slammer or even executed?  Can’t the police get away with murder?  With lying on the witness stand?  With lying to suspects? To  falsifying evidence?  With initiating prosecutions against people for victimless crimes?  With enforcing fictional jurisdictions?

The whole idea of a “police state” makes the police seem special and entitled to break the law.  The American police state has been growing since the 9/11 attack in A.D. 2001 and subsequent enactment (without being read by Congress) of the “Patriot Act”.  As a result of the “Patriot Act,” government in general and police have enjoyed new “immunities” for violating the law.

Read the rest of this entry »


Posted by on April 27, 2015 in Government as Gangsters, Immunity


Tags: , ,