18 USC § 3: Accessory after the fact Whoever, knowing that an offense against the United States has been committed, receives, relieves, comforts, or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial, or punishment, is an accessory after the fact.
Any Judge, Public Official, and/or Military Officer(s) who chooses to DISHONOR, RIDICULE, AND/OR TREAT WITH CONTEMPT THE PROCESS of TITLE 18 USC § 4 Law, has made him/her self an Accessory Accomplice to the Crimes having been committed.
Any Judge, Public Official, and/or Military Officer(s) who attempts to stop and/or impedes Citizens from filing Criminal Complaints against ORGANIZED CRIME in the Government, especially against crimes committed by themselves or their co-workers or agents, are committing Paper Terrorism (Domestic Terrorism, 18 USC § 2331 (5)), against Citizens. The Paper Terrorism being referred to in this process is initiated by Judges converting Criminal Complaints into Civil Complaints in order to evade the charges and open the door for Official Retaliation against the reporting Citizen(s). The alternative method initiated by Judges is to file the Criminal Complaints as Motions and to ORDER them as “stricken,” or to deny/discharge those Criminal Complaints as Frivolous, thereby, trying to evade the charges and render the lawful process, i.e. THE LAW, to report a crime, mandated by 18 USC § 4, null and void.
District 8 Federal Judges Laurie Smith Camp, F.A. Gossett III, John M. Gerrard, Joseph F. Bataillon, and Richard G. Kopf are involved in this ORGANIZED CRIME in reference to Criminal Complaints filed in Federal Court in Omaha, Nebraska stemming from Case No. CI 11-58 & CI 12-35 and Case # 8:12CR 56-LSC-FG3.
18 USC § 4 Mandates a Citizen to report Criminal Behavior or face Criminal Charges, fines and/or imprisonment. If the Citizen knows he/she is required by law to complain under18 USC § 4, and failure to report the crime can result in fine or imprisonment or both, and also knows the Judge is of such a character that he/she will retaliate against him/her the accuser, then the Citizen finds him/her self in the Terrifying situation of being Dammed if he/she doesn’t file (18 USC § 4) and Dammed if he/she does file (a victim of the Evil Character of the Judge). Any Judge who issues a public statement warning Citizens that they cannot file Criminal Charges is thereby inducing the Citizen to violate 18 USC § 4, and he, who has the Evil Character to retaliate against the Citizen, is a Judge who is engaging in Paper Terrorism (amongst other violations).
According to the foregoing, any Judge, Public Official, and/or Military Officer(s) who claims Citizens cannot file Criminal Complaints Peaceably Petitioning the Government for Redress of Grievances is committing Paper Terrorism (Domestic Terrorism, 18 USC § 2331 (5)), Rebellion or Insurrection (18 USC § 2383), and Treason (18 USC § 2381) against US Code and the U. S. Constitution & 18 USC § 4, when they attempt to Chill (scare, instill fear in) Citizens regarding their 1st Amendment Right to Peaceably Petition the Government for Redress of Grievances.
If Public officials do not have to obey Title 18 USC § 4, then Citizens have the Right to Conscientiously object to Selective Service without an Official Threat of imprisonment. On the same terms, the Military would not have any authority to prosecute any Citizen refusing Military service and the selective service system would be Null and Void.
If 18 USC § 4 is no good, then 10 USC (Uniform Code of Military Justice) is no good.
The Military’s primary purpose is to fight Foreign Enemies, but the military’s oath to defend the Constitution and the American people also includes fighting against domestic enemies.
If Citizens don’t report felony offenses committed by foreign or domestic enemies against the Constitution for the United States of America, and the laws made pursuant thereto, to some Judge or person in Civil or Military authority (18 USC § 4), then that failure to report constitutes harboring a Criminal, and aiding and abetting the Enemy. (18 USC § 2381 - Treason)
Some Federal Judges are attempting to procure Citizens to harbor and conceal the presence of the Public Official Domestic Enemies amongst us by denying Citizens the Rights and Responsibility to file Criminal Complaints as Mandated pursuant to 18 USC § 4, which being Mandatory, cannot, therefore, require a filing fee. (See, also, the Civil Rights Act of 1866.)
The Civil Rights Act, 1866 Sec. 4 And be it further enacted, That the district attorneys, marshals, and deputy marshals of the United States, the commissioners appointed by the circuit and territorial courts of the United States… are hereby specially authorized and required, at the expense of the United States, to institute proceedings against all and every person who shall violate the provisions of this act, and cause him or them to be arrested and imprisoned, or bailed, as the case may be, for trial before such court of the United States...
Any Judge, Public Official, and/or Military Officer(s) attempting to convert a Criminal Complaint filed pursuant to 18 USC § 4 into a Civil case and claiming the Citizen is required to pay a filing fee has and is committing Extortion.
Whoever, being an officer, or employee of the United States or any department or agency thereof, or representing himself to be or assuming to act as such, under color or pretense of office or employment commits or attempts an act of extortion, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both…
(2) The term “extortion” means the obtaining of property (money or personal information – 4th Amendment, etc.) from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right.
If any Judge, Public Official, and/or Military Officer(s) believes any of this Commercial Process to be False, said Judge, Public Official, and/or Military Officer(s) is required by their own respective government systems to produce Affidavit(s) specifically showing “Just Cause” with Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law to support their Specific disagreement claims, and these Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law must be sworn to be true, correct, materially complete, and not misleading, the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and be available for Public Inspection by the Court of Public opinion of the People/Citizens of this Nation. Anything less shall be considered a Non-Response, Dishonor, and Default on the part of
the Judge, Public Official, and/or Military Officer(s), and an evasion of Due Process.
Randy Due --Ex military (Civil Rights Advocate) Non-union Lawyer pursuant to 42 USC 1986
179 Green St. E., Pelham, Georgia 31779
(229) 294-6112 - - - email@example.com