Alan Bacon (sui Juris)
Lawful?
Thu Jan 8 11:09:29 2004
65.177.48.181

This Doctrine is designed to leave every Executive agent of the Federal government free to pursue any "random, unauthorized personal vendetta against the" free citizen, with the financial backing and the full weight of the government's machinery and Lawyers at the Executive agent's disposal. (Zinermon)
The Doctrine is designed to empower Executive agents of the Federal Government to "harass or persecute prisoners" AND FREE CITIZENS, under any pretense of authority or without any pretense of lawful authority other than their official titles. (Zinermon) The Doctrine is designed specifically to permit any state or federal government agent to "exceed the limits of his established search and seizure authority," to "wrongfully ... withhold" property, and to otherwise "disregard" and to "flout" the People's Laws. (Zinermon dissent)


According to the Doctrine, an Executive agent of the Government has no Constitutional Duty to "refrain" from committing an "Unauthorized Deprivation" if sufficient taxpayer money is "available" from the Government to the person deprived, (or to his heirs), by which he (or they) might "recover[] the value of the" Life, Liberty, or Property he has been unlawfully deprived of. http://www.law.utexas.edu/dawson/cases/racing/patin.htm


According to the Doctrine of Unauthorized Deprivation, BECAUSE the government has enough taxpayer's MONEY to pay "damages" (e.g., in a "tort action") for any "unconstitutional deprivation" committed by a government official, then "the random and unauthorized act of [government] officials (not pursuant to Law)" is not forbidden by the Constitution. Id.
The Doctrine has been expressly extended beyond its initial application to the "property" of incarcerated prisoners, to the property of free citizens, and then extended further "to specifically include deprivations of Liberty interests" of free citizens. Id.
The Rehnquist Court has even held that an unauthorized deprivation of "Life" by a government agent is not forbidden by the Constitution. "This doctrine dictates that a state actor's random and unauthorized deprivation of a [free citizen's, Life, Liberty or] property does not result in a violation of [Constitutional rights that will be respected]. http://home.olemiss.edu/~llibcoll/ndms/apr98/98D0052P.html
Under this Doctrine, Agents of the Government are no longer required by their Oath of Office "to follow established stat[utory] procedures [i.e., Law]" when dealing with the Life, Liberty, and Property of citizens. http://csmail.law.pace.edu/lawlib/legal/us-legal/judiciary/second-circuit/test3/97-9411.con.html


The Doctrine empowers every petty tyrant to intentionally falsely accuse a citizen of "crime", even for engaging in purely lawful activities (such as keeping
or displaying arms for lawful purposes http://www.gunowners.org/news/nws9702.htm ) and to thereby "disrupt his employment, drain his financial resources, curtail his associations, subject him to public obloquy, and create anxiety in him, his family and his friends" without authority of Law. http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/92-833.ZD.html


Know what civil Liberty IS, and you shall Know what it is Not. http://familyguardian.tzo.com/TaxFreedom/CitesByTopic/liberty.htm

See deprivations.doc on the Edification Library Disk @
http://www.freedom-school.com/edification.html


Or not, if it is to be it is up to us to do it!