|
o' my lord will use me for his will how many will be kill in the court of..............?
o our God where is God?
i took a step for him against his ememies see him do you standing behide me him alone is my hope savior of the poor out doors it pour covered in human emotions ignored out doors it was him
thank you for your ear just here if you can hear thank you for the hacks i owe it to president bush hear the pushing of monk shovels filling in the pit of unquality we ain't equal people protect the hoods back woods where's his killer for a bag of skittles we dindle into sweet nothings and satan american magna carta more nothings solomon once said meaningless this is a situtation that should have never occured
i'm collecting donations in the balance of fees for complaint see below
i have already requested help form the national action network via online services will they get it like the jobs didn't receive my calls?
if you would like to donate even a dollar that would only be 356 followers of truth jesus once said he is the truth the light so i fight for equality for the poor and the homeless those who are being aoppress by president obama and his roman soldiers local police and neighbor hood watch that slaughter the innocent for bias
please forward any donations to the light house of virginia beach in virginia
what will happen?
p.s. please pass this on to your friends and families change has to come and god promises are true the wicked shall be vanquished
original notarize ready to fly
Virginia:
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH ® Derrick Lee Willis ® DOB: 04/18/1972, SSN: 270-66-4841 ® CIVIL ACTION (Plaintiff) ® v. ® Commonwealth of Virginia, 2nd Precinct ® Verified Complaint 1. City of Virginia Beach 2. Princess Anne County 3. State of Virginia 4. Employee L. M. Wright 5. Jane doe 6. John doe ® Request For Jury Trial (Defendants) ® INTRODUCTION: Derrick L. Willis resident of Virginia Beach, Virginia hereby asserts the following claims against the defendants in the above-entitled action.
1. Violation of a Civil Right (Illegal Search and Seize) 2. False Imprisonment and False Arrest 3. Malicious Wounding and Malicious Prosecution 4. Intentional infliction of emotional distress
JURISDICTION:
The incidents happened in the commonwealth of Virginia, city of Virginia Beach;
therefore, Jurisdiction of this court arises under 28 U.S.C. sections 1331, and 1343(a)
FACTS: 1. On 11/02/2011 approx. 9:00 am one off duty police officer and his female partner without a search warrant approached a United States’ Citizen, a resident of Virginia Beach, VA walking down Virginia Beach BLVD with guns drawn to conduct an involuntary stop, search and seize. 2. The citizen went into shock at their presents when more officers poured across the street from the police department. 3. The citizen was in fear of his life of being shot, he couldn’t hear what the officers’ were yelling and much less think; and so he lowered his head and kept walking along. 4. When the female police office tackled him from behind causing abrasions to his left knee, while the first officer kept his gun aimed at citizen’s head and the officers that ran across the street encircled him. 5. By this time the citizen collapsed and was hand cuffed and drugged out the street and surrounded by more than four police officers. 6. At this time the lead Officer state’s “he’s not the one”; but, the citizen was still detained and searched. 7. The police officers pulled up his shirts and hooded sweat shirt and removed everything from his pockets (seizing a nickel bag of marijuana from his right leg inner watch pants’ pocket) and took his book bag. 8. Then the citizen was placed inside of a patrol car; and none of the police offices’ stated he was under arrest and when the arresting officer got inside the car; the citizen asked, “Why was he being detained?” 9. The officer Stated, “waiting for the detectives” and then the officer got out and returned to the back of the patrol car. 10. Sometime had passed before 2 detectives arrived and confirmed for the second time he was not the suspect in question of a shooting and that the police officers’ were looking for a gun. 11. She also stated, “You didn’t think you’ll be in back of a patrol car today and you’re smarter than the rest.” 12. In about another 5-10 minutes later the arresting officer returned with a Summons for Possession of Marijuana and the citizen instructed officer that he was not going to sign because the officers illegally searched him. 13. Then the Plaintiff was arrested and taken to the Sherriff’s department; but his belongings remained in the custody of the 2nd precinct, the arresting officer L.M. Wright stated; “when you get out come here to pick up your belongings.” 14. After spending one day in jail the plaintiff was given a personal bond and was released. 15. The plaintiff had to use a plastic bag for a belt and plastic straps that are used to hold Newspapers as shoe strings and go around begging for money to catch the bus; before the plaintiff obtained a 1.50 the plaintiff walk from Princess Anne back to the 2nd precinct; and when he got to the 2nd precinct he requested his belongings. 16. The clerk without looking for his belongings said; “that his belongings was not there.” 17. The Plaintiff was still upset from being arrested for evidence obtained from an illegal search and seize and spending a day in jail without under wear and a t shirt and unable to eat the food that was served because Plaintiff doesn’t eat pork and/or beef. 18. And when the clerk stated that his belongs was not there the Plaintiff took it as harassment and became angry because his belongings contained his winter jacket, money, ID’s, Bible, social security card, birth certificate, food stamp card, and other personal effects for his survival as a homeless man living on the streets in Virginia Beach. 19. She and another clerk started laughing and that made the Plaintiff even more irate, so he started yelling demanding that they return his belongings right now because the plaintiff had heard how the police took other people’s belongs without returning them and they had to go about getting them all over again. 20. Then an officer came from the back of the police department and one of the clerks went to check to see if she could find his belongings upon his request to make him feel more at ease. 21. The officer stayed in front with the plaintiff provoking him exchanging words and when the clerk return she told him that his belongs was sent to the first precinct. 22. Why wasn’t his belonging sent to the sheriff’s department with him during his arrest? 23. Then the plaintiff asked how come he wasn’t notified they had sent his belongings to the first precinct at his release and how was he supposed to get back to the first precinct when his belongings contained his money and they continued laughing. 24. The clerk place his belonging sheet behind the officer on a table and when the plaintiff moved to retrieve it the officer standing there stepped in front of him cutting off his pass saying something and the plaintiff was about to leave and the officer kept on provoking him; so then the plaintiff told him to suck his dick and at that time the officer stated he was under arrest. 25. The plaintiff ran outside and put his hands up ready to defend himself; because, he felt threaten and they weren’t even listening to what he had to say, it was them against him. 26. Then two or more officers followed him out and one hit the Plaintiff with a Taser in the right arm but the plaintiff pulled one of the prongs out, causing open wounds after the plaintiff was on the ground the police officer continued digging the Taser point into his right arm and the other officer pulled out his dread locks maybe five or six disfiguring plaintiff’s appears and his scalp was damaged in the process and had scant amounts of bleeding. 27. The Plaintiff also had additional open wounds to his left knee which under the Virginia law is malicious wounding. 28. Then the Plaintiff was arrested for resisting arrest and disorderly conduct.
29. Wherefore if the plaintiff was never charged with a malicious prosecution of possession of marijuana obtained during an illegal search and seize (dismissed on February 13, 2012), and harassed by the police when attempting to retrieve his belongs, these additional charges would have never occur; therefore, plaintiff is seeking Compensatory and punitive damages for 30 days’ time served, suspension of driver’s license, community service, 3 dollars a day fee for being incarcerated in jail, and an anger management class in these additional charges. 30. When the plaintiff finally retrieved his belongs his book bag straps were cut and other personal property was missing.
DAMAGES AND ELEMENTS OF EACH ALLEGATION BROUGHT FORTH BY PLAINTIFF:
COUNT 1: ILLEGAL SEARCH AND SEIZE
4th Amendment {1791} {The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.} A. § 19.2-59. Search without warrant prohibited; when search without warrant lawful No officer of the law or any other person shall search any place, thing or person, except by virtue of and under a warrant issued by a proper officer. Any officer or other person searching any place, thing or person otherwise than by virtue of and under a search warrant shall be guilty of malfeasance in office. Any officer or person violating the provisions of this section shall be liable to any person aggrieved thereby in both compensatory and punitive damages. Any officer found guilty of a second offense under this section shall, upon conviction thereof, immediately forfeit his office, and such finding shall be deemed to create a vacancy in such office to be filled according to law. 1. The plaintiff again repeats the allegations: Yes an off duty Police officer can conduct an involuntary search and seize in order to protect the public from danger; but, was his search done in a reasonable manner and was it constitutional? It was Certainly not a routine terry stop (Terry v Ohio) a brief frisk and pat down searching for a fire arm which is warrant justifiable; but, when the Police Officer with no probable cause pulled up his long shirt and reached in and searched the citizen’s right leg watch pocket pulling out a nickel bag of marijuana which was not in plain view it became unreasonable and therefore it was constituted as an illegal search and seize; and such evidence is not permissible/admissible in a court of law. The officer himself even stated, “That he was not the suspect in the shooting” and the citizen then was falsely imprisoned and later to be falsely arrested based on unlawfully collected evidence. The officers’ in question didn’t instruct citizen he was under arrest at any time during the altercation and by the circuit court opinions: Miranda warning not given because defendant were handcuffed for over an hour and not free to leave in spite of a statement by the police to the contrary, they were entitled to Miranda warnings about their right to remain silent and the right to counsel; because the warnings were not given defendants’ motion to suppress were granted. Common Wealth v. Hughes, 69VA. Cir. 482, 2006 Va. Cir. LEXIS 85 (Martinville 2006). Evidence deemed inadmissible. - where a police officer did not have specific and articulable facts upon which to conclude that defendant was armed and dangerous before frisking defendant for weapons during a traffic stop, the search was unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment; as a result, the trial judge erred in failing to suppress the evidence. Christian v. commonwealth, No. 0303-03-1, 2004 Va. App. LEXIS 190 (Ct. of Appeals Mar. 2, 2004).
COUNT 2: VIOLATIONS OF FALSE IMPRISONMENT § 1 Definition of false imprisonment 32 Am Jur 2d FALSE IMPRISONMENT {False imprisonment is the unlawful restraint by one person of the physical liberty of another. 1 False imprisonment entails such restraint without consent 2 or legal justification. 3 In this phrase, the word "false" seems to be exactly synonymous with "unlawful," 4 and the gravamen of the action lies in the unlawful detention.} 2. Plaintiff repeats alleging, when the lead Police Officer stated that the plaintiff was not the one and the other officers encircled plaintiff blocking his path and handcuffing him at that point plaintiff was unable to leave and this is false imprisonment defined under this definition, but; the officers carried the false imprisonment farther when they decided to use a patrol car as a cage by placing plaintiff inside until detectives came to confirm he was not the person in question and later on given a summons for possession which on February 13, 2012 was dismissed.
COUNT 3: VIOLATIONS OF FALSE ARREST § 3 Distinction between false imprisonment and false arrest {Some courts have described false arrest and false imprisonment as causes of action which are distinguishable only in terminology. 14 The two have been called virtually indistinguishable, 15 and identical. 16 However, the difference between them lies in the manner in which they arise. 17 In order to commit false imprisonment, it is not necessary either to intend to make an arrest 18 or actually to make an arrest. 19 By contrast, a person who is falsely arrested is at the same time falsely imprisoned, 20 and an unlawful arrest may give rise to a cause of action for either false arrest or false imprisonment. 21 Thus, it has been stated that false arrest and false imprisonment are not separate torts, and that a false arrest is one way to commit false imprisonment; since an arrest involves a restraint, it always involves imprisonment.} 3. Plaintiff repeats alleging that the false imprisonment lead to a false arrest for when the plaintiff refused to sign the summons he was taken to the 2nd precinct and processed for possession and after taken and incarcerated at the Sherriff’s Department on Princess Anne for 24 hours until plaintiff received a personal bond. COUNT 4: MALICIOUS PROSECUTION Defined by Black’s Law Dictionary, 9th Edition, page 1044 The institution of a criminal or civil proceeding for an improper purpose and without probable cause A. The trot requires proof of four elements: a. The initiation or continuation of a lawsuit b. Lack of probable cause for the lawsuit’s initiation c. Malice; and d. Favorable termination of the original lawsuit. Restatement (second) of Torts section 674-81B (1977).
B. The tort claim resulting from the institution of such a proceeding. Once a wrongful prosecution has ended in the defendant’s favor, he or she may sue for tort damages.
4. On February 13, 2012 the original case for possession of marijuana was dismissed in favor of the plaintiff; this proves that the defendant L. M. Wright didn’t have reasonable grounds to bring forth criminal charges against plaintiff and continued after plaintiff instructed her that the search was illegal but she continued and was granted two continuances prolonging the outcome of a not guilty verdict. All four elements are met and L.M. Wright and all defendants in the above actions are guilty of Malicious Prosecution.
COUNT 5: MALICIOUS WOUNDING Section 18.2-51.2 Aggravated malicious wounding; penalty A. If any person maliciously shoots, stabs, cuts or wounds any other person, or by any means causes bodily injury, with the intent to maim, disfigure, disable or kill, he shall be guilty of a class 2 felony if the victim is thereby severely injured and is caused to suffer permanent and significant physical impairment. 5. On both occasions during the plaintiff’s arrest he suffered injuries sustained to his left leg and knee; and on the second arrest he was Taser by an Officer even after he was subdued and resting on his back the officer was digging the Taser point into his right upper arm causing bleeding. But the plaintiff is mainly looking for damages under this law because one officer pulled out his Dread Locks which disfigured his appearance and the dread locks was not just a hair style but represented a life style and he took it as kingship so the officer took away this meaning from him causing mental distress. And even though his hair can grow back the plaintiff scalp had been majorly damaged and will eventually go bald from this incident. The hair in the places where the hair was pulled out is thin and some spots remain bald if cut short. And under the definition stated above the officer who maimed and disfigured him is guilty of malicious wounding. COUNT 6: INTENTIONALINFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESSA Defined by Black’s Law Dictionary, 9TH EDITION, page 883 The tort of intentionally or recklessly causing another person severe emotional distress through one’s extreme or outrageous acts
A. plaintiff must show that the defendant's conduct: (1) is intentional or reckless; (2) offends generally accepted standards of decency or morality; (3) is causally connected with the defendant's emotional distress; and (4) caused emotional distress that was severe.
6. Plaintiff re-alleges when the Officers approached with guns already drawn and with the force of four to five members of a team to conduct an involuntary stop search and seize in front of the police department on a malicious accusation that the plaintiff was a murderer; slandering his character showing the intent of recklessness, and full of malice acts to intimidate the plaintiff, the officers did abuse their civil duties and authority to protect and serve the community; the Officers did inflict emotional distress upon the plaintiff. See above the conduct of said officers involved; but the, officers’ recklessness didn’t stop after plaintiff went into shock and had to be drug out of the street, they continued by violating his civil rights to privacy and searched his pockets mentioned in the above statements. But, it continued when the plaintiff went to pick up his belongs at the 2nd precinct and the precinct had sent his belongings less than 24-48 hours later to another precinct without informing plaintiff and knowing his money and other personal effects the plaintiff needed was in his bag. And also when the two officers pulled out his hair and continued to dig the Taser point into his arm showed recklessness with intent to intimidate, maim, and/or disfigure. And what was the cutting of his book bag straps was supposed to do to his mental mind state? Plaintiff was traumatized by the officers’ conduct and suffered nightmares and an increase fear of police officers in general. But, the intent to punish an innocent man didn’t stop there the commonwealth attempted to prosecute the plaintiff on an illegal act conducted by poorly trained officers. No Man or Women should have to suffer these types of abuse from any state agency given the authority to protect and serve. What peace are these government agencies keeping? I ask one final question quoting, Blackstone; “better to let 10 guilty men go than to condemn one innocent man? If anyone over steps the laws set forth by our four fathers then they should be punished for the sake of freedom; that is what America stands for life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Without it where would we be so I hope you see it as I do and find the defendants guilty of all charges brought forth in an attempt to protect and deter the actions of a few which give police officers across this great country a bad reputation. Thank you for your time and considerations. The average paid to victims of such crime in the United States is 2,000,000.00; but, the plaintiff suffered more than one crime committed by defendants in the above actions. This in some peoples’ views could be considered a conspiracy. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendants: COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA 2ND PRECINCT, CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, PRINCESS ANNE COUNTY, LM WRIGHT AND OTHER UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS for injunctive relief and actual, special, compensatory and punitive damages, costs, expenses, and interest in an amount deemed at time of trial to be just, fair, and appropriate.
By……………………………………………….. Derrick Lee Willis LPN/Paralegal Plaintiff PLAINTIFF'S VERIFICATION The undersigned, being duly sworn, deposes and says that I am the Plaintiff herein, and have read the foregoing pleading filed on my behalf, and the facts stated therein are true. March 21, 2012 _____________________________ Derrick Lee Willis Subscribed and sworn to before me, this 21st day of March , 2012. ______________________________ Notary
thanks for the support
My Lord Te-Te the end to everything
|