Today we cannot sue certain individuals for the harm they inflict upon their victims because they have one of several types of immunity from suit — “propsecutorial immunity” for prosecutors who fabricate evidence and engage in perjury; immunity for officials engaged in “judicial-type” functions, such as administrative hearing officers; and “immunity” when judges give out immunity to such others as board members and other governing officials.
These “immunities” have their root source in the “judicial immunity” doctrine that was given life by the U.S. Supreme Court in its decision in Stump v. Sparkman 435 U.S. 349 (1978). And once “judges” gave themselves “immunity” they were on the hook to start giving out immunities to others or be exposed. WHY should “others” get immunity if they are not “judges”, you ask? Because the Supreme Court’s ruling is a fraud and those who engage in the act of defrauding need to be protected by others or their fraud will sooner or later be disclosed.
The first group of individuals to be bribed with immunity are prosecutors. And for good reason – although not a legal reason. Prosecutors are the only “ENFORCEMENT” segment of government that can “prosecute” criminals. Clearly if the Supreme Court Judges have committed a criminal act in granting immunity to themselves they risk having a brave Prosecutor sue the judges who established this ‘fraud’ of judicial immunity and send them to jail or at least put an end to the fraud. For this reason the Supreme Court Judges needed to expand their “immunity” to the “prosecutors”. Otherwise “prosecutors” may prosecute the judges for their criminal act in establishing immunity.
What makes the “judicial immunity doctrine” unlawful? The doctrine violates 28 USC 455, which PROHIBITS a judge or “JUSTICE” from sitting in a case in which he or she has an interest, or his or her impartiality may be questioned. Let’s ask this as a questions…. How does a “judicial immunity doctrine” flow from a civil lawsuit in which a “judge” is a defendant? Is it not true that “judges have a direct interest” in the “powers of judges”? If the answer is YES, then all “JUDGES AND JUSTICES” cannot decided such a case because they are “DISQUALIFIED” under 28 USC 455 for the very fact their “IMPARTIALITY” can be questioned due to their “INTEREST” in their own power. Clearly the Supreme Court Judges used the case Stump v Sparkman to further their own powers and immunites — an act that violates 28 USC 455
Our Society has suffered so much because corrupt judges and lawyers get away with unlawful conduct because of the “IMMUNITY DOCTRINE” — the FRAUD UPON SOCIETY.
Once again it seems true that “At the core of our rotten government we find lawyers”!
