734 Rutland Avenue
Teaneck, NJ 07666
814–880–9308
January 4, 2010
U. S. Magistrate
U. S. Courthouse
500 Pearl Street
New York, NY 10007
Re: Violations # H5116786 Impeding/Oppose Federal Officer 10/26/09
# H5116785
Distribute Flyers/Fed Prop 10/26/09
# H5116787
Distribute Flyers/Fed Prop 11/09/09
# H5116789
Distribute Flyers/Fed Prop 11/16/09
Dear Sir or Madam:
Recently, I received the above-named notices to
either pay $100.00 fines or appear in your court at 10:30 am on
1/19/10. I do not intend to do either for the following reasons:
1. The three citations were for violations of 41 CFR, subsection C
§ 102–74.415(c) for distributing literature on federal
property. However according to 41 CFR §102–71.25.
“Who must comply with GSA’s real property policies,”
Federal agencies must comply with these regulations. Since I am
not a federal employee, it is not incumbent on me to comply.
Federal agencies are not given the right to enforce the regulations,
only to comply with them.
2. In fact it is not even incumbent on federal employees to comply,
because 41 CFR, subsection C § 102–74.415(c) is in violation
of Amendment I of the U. S. Constitution.
3. The statutory offense is not applicable, because the police officers
made an “illegal arrest,”— actually a
kidnapping. I was not booked nor brought before a
magistrate. In fact, an ambulance was called, I was loaded into
the ambulance and sent to the Bellevue Medical Center psychiatric ward,
where I was released.
4. Officer Barnes committed perjury in the police report when he
charged me with forceful resistance. I was lying on the ground
motionless immediately upon being placed “under arrest” and
maintained that condition until I was in the hospital under custody of
the hospital staff. A video of the “arrest” exists at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnnwQ2RPMxg.
Title 18, United States Code, Section 242, provides
for one or more persons who, under color of law, statute, ordinance,
regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any inhabitant of any state,
territory, or district to the deprivation of rights, privileges, or
immunities secured by the Constitution, or laws of the United States...
shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one
year or both.
Title 18, United States Code, Section 242, with its
color of law provision, gives a cause of action to apply Title 18,
United States Code, Section 241, because Section 241 needs two persons
in disguise and Section 242 provides the second person under color of
law as the "QUASI SUMMONS" mentioned herein implies that a
magistrate is acting in concert to commit an overt act of fraud
and extortion for conversion.
Further, United States Code, Title 18, section 242
provides for one or more persons who, under color of law, statute,
ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any inhabitant of
any state, territory, or district to the deprivation of rights,
privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or
laws of the United States. . . shall be fined not more than $1,000 or
imprisoned not more than one year or both.
"...an...officer who acts in violation of the
Constitution ceases to represent the government." Brookfield Co. v
Stuart, (1964) 234 F. Supp 94, 99 (U.S.D.C., Wash. D.C.) [...meaning,
he is not operating in his official capacity, but in his individual
capacity, unable to use his official position as a judicial officer as
a shield against prosecution. - RJB]
"...an officer may be held liable in damages to any
person injured in consequence of a breach of any of the duties
connected with his office...The liability for nonfeasance, misfeasance,
and for malfeasance in office is in his 'individual', not his official
capacity..." 70 AmJur2nd Sec. 50, VII Civil Liability.
"Decency, security, and liberty alike demand that
government officials be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are
commands to the citizen. In a Government of laws, existence of the
government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law
scrupulously. Crime is contagious. If government becomes a lawbreaker,
it breeds contempt for the law...it invites every man to become a law
unto himself...and against that pernicious doctrine, this court should
resolutely set its face." Olmstead v U.S., 277 US 348, 485; 48 S. Ct.
564, 575; 72 LEd 944.
"Judges must maintain a high standard of judicial
performance with particular emphasis upon conducting litigation with
scrupulous fairness and impartiality." 28 USCA 2411; Pfizer v. Lord,
456 F 2d 532; cert denied 92 S Ct 2411; US Ct App MN, (1972).”
"State Judges, as well as federal, have the
responsibility to respect and protect persons from violations of
federal constitutional rights." Gross v. State of Illinois, 312 F 2d
257; (1963).”
"Government immunity violates the common law maxim
that everyone shall have a remedy for an injury done to his person or
property." Firemen’s Ins. Co. of Newark, NJ. v. Washburn County,
2 Wisc 2d 214 (1957).”
Demand is upon you to withdraw the invalid Notices
and notify me within ten (10) days from receipt of this Notice and
Demand or Action will commence in the United States District Court
pursuant to Rule 7(a) and (c) of the criminal rules of procedure by the
jurisdiction provided in Title 42, United States Code, sections 1983
and 1985; Title 28, U.S.C. sections 1331 and 1343 and others with Title
18, U.S.C., sections 241, 242, 872, 1621, 1622, and 1623 providing for
the administration of the penalties.
Your office would better serve the public if you
stopped harassing harmless civilians and concentrated on curbing the
criminal activities of the police. Further attempts to enforce
the citations and/or the statutory offense will be considered criminal
harassment.
Sincerely
yours,
Julian Heicklen