mardi, août 06, 2013

Rosetta Stone, omerta, Balladur, Sarkozy, Strauss-Kahn, Charpenel, magistrates, MP, rape, robbery, prostitution, pimping.

Rosetta Stone, omerta, balladur, Sarkozy, Strauss-Kahn, Charpenel, magistrates, détputée, rape, robbery, prostitution, pimping.




d.50 @ gmx.fr



The reference text is the French text.









Paris, Monday, August 5, 2013









Mr. prosecutor in Paris









Re: Rosetta Stone and language of omerta





Copy to:





President of the Republic

Madam Attorney





Mr. Attorney General to Paris



Monsieurle prosecutor in Lille



Instruction of Mr. Renaud VAN judge RUYMBEKE

Mr. Justice THE LOIRE Roger instruction



Mr. Fillon Honorary Deputy Prime Minister













Mr. prosecutor



Networks of French executives familiar with the omerta information that Mr. Sarkozy in his capacity as Head of State had violated an MP are quality after prostitute, organized a network of hotel pimping probably in combination, stole IRS.



By cross-reading of three court cases involving persons of the same rank, I ask this here omerta, malfunctions it creates in the state, and renew the request that the service is honest and substitutes judicial action.



1) - Introduction

Le Monde 24 July 2013 published an article by Mr. Gérard Davet and Fabrice Lhomme. This article focuses on the evolution of the judicial inquiry into the Karachi kickbacks affair and the use of special funds of the Prime Minister by the latter during the 1995 election campaign.



In response to an order of 26 June of the judges, the prosecution issued July 18, 2013 an additional indictment for "embezzlement" and "concealment" about it.



I found an issue that arises in information made by Mrs. William on an alleged rape by Mr. Sarkozy, the Head of State at the relevant time.



This issue is the ability of judges to examine an activity officially covered by a derogation of the common law (an immunity or secret) when this activity is to use the law for purposes other than public service that is subject the function considered.



Virtually all states have abandoned the principle of the validity of the derogation legalities to cover the personal action of the leaders of the state, apart from France, Sudan and North Korea.



The criminal investigation into Mr Balladur therefore establishes a law that puts France in the field of common law societies.



I want here:

1 - Rate Balladur jurisprudence

2 - Include in this case my application to open a preliminary investigation of the allegations against Mr. Sarkozy

3 - To establish the existence of a debate within the State to substitute parallel rights law from the Civil Code, as Mr Sarkozy by the alleged rape.

When Cahuzac case, the media have repeatedly seriner us that all evil comes from the unfortunate oversight of art. 40 proper code. This requires all officials to pursue a criminal information concerning public officials. From this point of view, the text is also a reminder.



2) - The Balladur jurisprudence

In 1995, Mr. Balladur, Prime Minister, used at the discretion of the funds that are reserved for this purpose.



The judges say in 2013 that Mr. Balladur is accountable for the use of secret funds Matignon.



However, the discretionary use of special funds was legal in 1995. Mr Balladur sincerely believed justified in saying: "I used all legal means at my disposal. '" (According to Mr. Galy-Dejean, former campaign treasurer Mr Balladur)



People (treasurers, seconded police, etc.) are interviewed by judges to have handled the money did not have the feeling of being paid on illegal funds to deal with a bully, to be themselves themselves.



Special funds are explicitly set the discretionary service Minister and he will put an end to this practice in 2001, six years later.



Mr Balladur is well in evidence of secrecy and clean these funds legal irresponsibility.



In this regard: The Chained Duck, Wednesday, July 31, 2013, P3:

a-"Life and Death of Mrs. Henriette secret banker of the Interior," Didier Hassoux

b-"The investigation Balladur turns you her water coil? "Hervé Martin



The use of these funds in 1995, considered legal in 1995 is considered illegal by the judicial investigation 2010-2013.



The investigation established that the judges:

"Since its release in late 2010, the survey of judges and Van Ruymbeke The Loire has accumulated documents and testimony credence to the use by the team of Mr Balladur during the presidential campaign of the famous" secret "fund available to ministers, the government of Lionel Jospin decided suppression in 2001. "(The world, 24,07,13).







The judges also deviate another obstacle is the wealth of uses. Quarrel with Mr Balladur does not condemn all have to return to the use of these funds for specific purposes? That call to justice virtually all ministers?



Judges respond by ignoring and making this a useless digression.



This offset from the previous practice of law, the criminalization of normal use before, indicates that French judges have the ability to change the interpretation of the laws of exceptions based on the publicly honest or dishonest use that make the beneficiaries and the public importance of these wrongful practices.



If the allegations are true, Mr. Balladur had use of these funds has distorted the free exercise of the expression of universal suffrage. This wrongful use is associated with handling international financial negotiations of France for the purpose of illegal financing of political parties and other, as shown in the case of Karachi.



So the judges feel competent to review the use of funds that lose their "secret" character no longer keep their "public character." This use of "legal" becomes a "misuse of public funds."



Otherwise, if the judges use to cover the fraudulent pretext of legal irresponsibility of these secret funds, they justify, not a discretionary use for the public good of the funds, but the Constitution in public procedures parallel proceedings, legal and factual.



Calling possibly mafia these parallel proceedings can not disqualify the importance for the functioning of government. It is the creation of a parallel to the legal world sets from the Civil Code in question. Parallel and competing soon. Mafia or Sharia are the two most currently active parallel proceedings. There are surely others.



In describing these judicial proceedings as illegal, judges say there can be no other law than that produced from the Civil Code.



It should be noted that doing this work requalification derogations despite little chance to lead the proceedings, for reasons of limitation in particular. They therefore do not reflect this standard means used by managers to avoid legal qualifications and judgments.



It also sets a precedent.



3) - The application of the law Balladur



1 - The presentation of the issue

A-A lawyer expose the folder of the most learned and adjusted terms. My concern is not to supplement the work and skills of lawyers.



It is to draw attention to a crime and ask them to consider according to the rules of art.



Since the B-19 and 27 July 2012, the court is seized of an opening of a preliminary investigation into the information made public by Mrs. William of a fact alleged rape by Mr. Sarkozy, head of application the state at the time of the facts, Ms. Doe MLA, representing the legislature at the time of the facts.



C-This case includes:

1 - Two parts, rape and taxation

2 - The aims and consequences of this spin

3 - A question of legitimacy of judicial intervention.



2 - The two components

A component-Rape

-A member has a view at the Elysee Mr. Head of State to obtain a grant. This banality takes place during a medals ceremony at the Elysee Palace.



b-Mr Sarkozy is in the exercise of his functions as Chief Executive.

MPP is the same in his official role as part of the Legislature.



c-There is credible evidence that that day Ms. MPP:

a-Do not lie on the path of the Head of State by accident but because we are placed.

b-It was probably expected to be included in a premeditated institutional manipulation.

If the facts are true, the conspiracy qualification in addition to others.



d-In the usual business terms rapists and other sex offenders, Mr. Sarkozy has a market, a contractual relationship, the honorable Member:

a-You suck me

b-You have your grant

Honorable member leaves with the grant. The investigation should determine the health precautions taken for this blowjob and risks incurred by the honorable member.



e-doing, he establishes between the parties:

1 - A report of prostitution. The act of organizing a paid sex as a prostitution. It also forms a pandering, since prostitution is organized in hotel pimping, the place of prostitution is the place of its formation, its control, its profit off customers.



2 - A report of rape as sexual intercourse was forced. This constraint is constitutive of prostitution. It is formed by blackmail and abuse of authority.



3 - This constraint in the report of prostitution and the creation of this report shall constitute a pimping, hotel here.



h The fact that the rapist is the Head of State, the Executive Branch, and the MPP is violated in practice, a member of the legislative branch, involves the following qualifications faults:

Rape of women, rape of MP, the Legislature rape, rape of the Constitution.



i-This dual practice of rape and prostitution:

- A directive to the state administration by Chef.

- The formation of a parallel administrative law administrative law from the Civil Code.



B-The financial component

This grant is no longer a discretionary act as the authorities make every day to resolve situations.

This sum acting subsidy is in fact become the payment of a password.

Thereby, it became a personal property of the donor and the recipient.

Mr. Sarkozy then gives the order to leave the money the Treasury.

By what right? This is a private expense.

This is a "diversion of public fund."

Those running are accomplices.

Honorable member has an amount diverted. This is a "concealment" background hijacked.

It transmits these funds to local public services covered by this grant. These services are also receivers of embezzlement.









The funds go directly from the Treasury to the target community. But the immateriality of the gift and possession of money does not change the fact that they are private acts performed by fraudulent use of public procedures and fraudulent possession of public money for personal purposes payment of a private act and pay a private act, prostitutive password.



The tax is robbed and beneficiary communities of the pseudo-subsidy receiver of stolen goods.



As are representatives of the two powers of the Republic, it is not possible to say that their actions are governed by the rule of not having not taken, money that has no odor, etc. . This is what is established by questioning Mr. Balladur on kickbacks and special funds.



In the case of the Elysee, he also follows in that:

-Mr Sarkozy has appropriated personally a sum to his lifestyle, so his income.

He has not declared. He did not pay taxes.

By what right?



Ms. b-MPP did the same.

She donated the money to a state authority does not apply to the tax exemption what his tax status in tax returns Ms. MPP.

It can be argued that it is for the fruit of forced rape. The fact remains that this amount must be reported on both sides.

The Treasury must recover the amount overpaid.

The community must repay this amount illegally paid.



c-For Madam Deputy and the beneficiary Local authority of the pseudo-grant in good faith, it can end up being a zero-sum game. The obligation of entries legalization is not so far removed.



d-For Mr Sarkozy, it is otherwise.

There was an actual paid service. Instead of paying his money, Mr Sarkozy is acquitted by a misuse of public funds in an amount equal to the grant initially provided. He must repay the IRS the amount of that sum. , Regardless of any penalties.



2 - The effects of the spin between the two branches of government

A-In the guise of a perfectly legal grant application, he circulated in the operation of undue political manipulation of public funds that accompanies rape.



B-This double movement organizes:

a-Rape, simply. There may be something to say publicly.

b-A subordination, but symbolic public, the legislative branch to the executive branch. The obligation to real blowjob is a classic advertising enslavement.

c-The creation of a parallel law in public administration, including the Head of State is precisely the Chef. An official law, based on the Civil Code, an informal nestled right in the official procedures code.



d-What is taking place is a double legitimacy of the order of the Civil Code and Sharia that some people are trying to impose.

e-The fact that it appears as parallel law simply villainous should not blind us. This is a right enshrined in the administrative practices of government departments it is.



If the head of state rape a person, a member of Parliament, and switches to the body, these facts are simultaneously directives addressed to all governments under his direction.



This parallel administrative law is not yet a de facto right. The ormerta is being made for it to become law a competitor Administrative Code of the Civil Code.



C-Judicial proceedings study this information publicly given by Mrs. William let you know if the IRS to two channels of distribution of money, the Civil Code and the omerta mafia and all others, or if he has a alone.



D-In tax matters, the immunity would send us back to before the States-General of 1789. Prior to the formation of public finance.

We would return:

a-A confusion of royal and public finances.

b-In the absence of public control of finance said confused.



E-The conduct of public finances is primarily an institutional matter. The royal fiscal administration was no less honest or less competent than his Republican alter ego. It was just royal and bankruptcy comes from.



3 - The legitimacy of judges

The interest of the inquest on Mr Balladur is institutionally established that there is no reason to examine the crime executives beneficiaries of specific legal provisions and certainly legitimate in their honest job.





No state secrets, no immunity, is there to ensure personal or factional criminality, or both, of those who have enormous powers that are theirs as long as they are put at the service of general interest.



What applies to one applies to the other. Except that one has to Omerta and the other not.



4) - The omerta

Mr. Sarkozy is not declared untouchable. The question is not asked. This is not immunity is the Omerta.



The omerta is not directly the result of justice. It is first mentioned by the media.



The formula for Mrs. William, saying that if a woman does not overcome it, rape, she did not make policy, summarizes the device:

-has been advised to the principle

b-At the same time the fact decriminalization and its termination is disqualified.



All the newspapers talk about this book and this device will resume disqualify any idea in advance of prosecution of the case. These and Those who would eventually in the book of Mrs. William matter of an action or policy, they are warned exclusive intellectual circles, political, media.



We are in obscurantist and anti-democratic regression. Stakeholders found the joys of imprecation, invocation Satanist, the curse.



This is certainly a remarkable case of control of information through censorship organized by the famous "civil society", in 89-91, would revolutionize the practice of state power.



The distinction that the journalists, feminists, politicians, academics, between Mr Balladur, Sarkozy, Strauss-Khan, to organize Omerta the facts attributed to Mr. Sarkozy, reports the sordid distinctions low-police.



Recall that Ms. Guillaume reported rape. The case for justice.



5) - Mr. Sarkozy and the other two

Mr Sarkozy is concerned with questioning their sexual behavior and taxation.

These questions can be found treated in two other cases involving two persons of the same rank as him, or affected by conditions similar to those that concern under Chief of exceptional procedures.



-Mr Balladur has asked for embezzlement.

b-Strauss-Khan was questioned for a sexual practice that are at fault.



6) - The differences between equal

See differences in the judicial treatment of these cases.



1 - The embezzlement

a-Mr Balladur

Mr Balladur, Prime Minister at the relevant time is the subject of a judicial inquiry.

The allegations relate to the misuse of public funds by the creep and even sense of public funds.

Mr Balladur does not steal public funds. It gives the legal use of public funds moral sense that can be attached to the principles of public service that defines the use of all public funds.



b-Mr Sarkozy

Mr. Sarkozy gives the embezzlement of public funds a villainous direction. The IRS expects to distribute a grant, in fact, pay a password. We go there the discretion to enter into outright fraud.

This is voluntary and announced by journalists such public omerta. This code of silence is taken by the court.



2 - The criminal sexual misconduct

A-Strauss-Khan

Strauss-Kahn, head of state at the time of the facts, is the subject of a judicial inquiry.



The allegations concern participation in commercial contract for sexual services by using these paid services. They do not affect participation in the formation of the shopping area, or at the meeting of the two parties or the moral or material benefit of the commercial part.



The commercial part of this activity is the fact prostitutive free people and an exclusively contractual and financial report.



Strauss-Kahn was indicted for being a customer of a prostitute and not to have benefited off clientele which is the place of definition of pimping.



The involvement of Mr. Strauss-Khan in procuring is deducted supposed affirmed. It is not factual. In fact, it is not a user of a publicly free sexual service.



The Court of Appeal of Douai said in its judgment that Mr. Strauss-Khan is to "promote and prostitution activity he fired a quick profit." By characterizing the offending activity as "prostitution activity" and not "pimp activity," the Court of Appeal indicates that what is characterized as pimping is actually even use commercial sexual services between free people of their decisions.



The Court of Appeal confuses two realities, pimping and prostitution, as they say that the court ordered the sentences to run concurrently.



The court shall decide all questions. What interests us here are the differences:

1 - Among the charges against Strauss-Khan and the facts reported by Mrs. William M. Sarkozy on.

2 - Between the vigorous action of justice to Mr. Strauss-Khan and continuing through the righteousness of omerta decided through the media about Mr. Sarkozy.



B-Mr Sarkozy

a-Mr Sarkozy is concerned with:

- A similar status as Head of State



b-There are two differences:

1 - The first place of Mr Sarkozy in the organization of the procurement qualification.

- Mr. Sarkozy does not use pimps. It is the major pimp. It is likely that it is not alone.

Indeed, it is the creator of prostitution and not mere user. It turns an ordinary elective report report prostitution. Without him, prostitution does not exist. It provides the place, the money, and as the whore.

- It is beneficial as a client of the use of forced labor.

- It is beneficial as organizer of the contractual relationship.

The creation of this report prostitutif allows him

- From getting sucked

- To do so at the expense of the State

- On the lower publicly Parliament, the other Power of the Republic.

- From an administrative dictate conduct that falls outside the Civil Code.







2 - The second concerns the role of prostitute and the customer relationship to it.

Mr. Sarkozy forced through blackmail a woman into prostitution to obtain information necessary for the exercise of his profession and the continuation of it by his re-election grant.

Impose a sexual penetration is rape.

There are both rape and pimping.



Mr. Sarkozy did exactly the same work as that of Albanian thugs who abuse women to force them to accept a report of prostitution and not just a report of rape. Money makes the difference.



Unlike Strauss-Khan, Mr. Sarkozy himself is pimp and rapist. Or, again in contrast to Strauss-Khan, Justice relays omerta advocated by the media.



3 - Effect of omerta

This led to the omerta undue protection of a litigant against others. This is a breach of equality between French.



7) - Associations and omerta



This omerta uncovers conflicting conflicting judicial policies. On the occasion of these two cases, it sets up a redeployment of public judicial mechanisms for the benefit of a private judicial system.



This code of silence is as an organizer censorship of silence. The observation of the facts leads to the conclusion that it is a particularly silent bruillant debate slope.



Apparently nobody cares the Sarkozy case. Nobody wants to hear.



I think that silence is understandable and not organized until the commissioning public scandal of the Strauss-Kahn case.



The latter is the complement for the Sarkozy case. It depicts the public indictment of a man of the rank of Head of State at the time, accused of pimping and lust.



Associations are what immediately link between the two cases. Others can say they treat separately separate cases. Journalists, judges, lawyers, litigants, etc.. may not want diperser. No associations.



These associations are either feminists or prohibitionist towards prostitution. They can not say that they deal only with the Strauss-Kahn case not to disperse. Their raison d'être is the identity of the various cases related to prostitution and violence against women.



They do not deal with the case parcequ'elles Sarkozy are instructed to do so. In one way or another. At this level, the omerta is an indicator of social control over the associations, feminist and prohibition movement in this case.



The United States has put all their influence in favor of Mr Sarkozy. This is the vassal of Americans in France. He proclaimed himself a voice of America



- Wikileaks revealed that during the conflict against Iraq, as Minister, Mr Sarkzoy have written a letter to the U.S. government to pledge allegiance to the American policy in conflict with that of the French government to which he belonged. If an American minister would do that, he would be charged with treason and collusion with a foreign power.

- All additional revenue since May 6 20012 it just fake conferences organized by U.S. companies are the usual relay the U.S. government.



A countdown, Strauss-Kahn is the man who does not want the U.S. in European politics (France, EU) and global (IMF, World Bank, major conferences etc..). No need to ask why, the facts speak for themselves.



Both the case of Carlton bronca the oxford, to prevent Mr. Strauss-Kahn to give a lecture there are manifestations of American policy followed by the removal of the man file. Strauss-Kahn has understood that keeps repeating "politics is behind me. ". He said the opposite in an interview on French television back in NY.



Americans alone have the ability to act with a long spoon and subordinate states in their global hunt for men who displease them. Examples of Mr. Assange and Mr. Snowden is not subject to a separate imperial policy.



Between two men of the same rank, one who fucking whores, free, willing paid between two conferences, and the other constraint a woman to make him a blowjob, then she came to seek help, he should be no problem for either feminists or for prohibitionists to focus their ire on the second. They may even attack the two, it is a delicacy, bankable.

Yet it is one that hinders the United States is agoni of injury, the other is omitted any statement. There is no unequal treatment. There is an exclusive treatment.



All associations, elected journalites, feminists have been warned by me in this application to open a preliminary investigation of Mr. Sarkozy. Personal responded.



8) - The EACP

However, an association can not hide behind any pressures on it, behind a moutonier behavior, etc., to explain his silence by atoning and justifying cowardice.



This is the "Action Teams against pimping 'Association (EACP) civil party in the case of Carlton Lille.



This association shows its ambition to become a European and even global. It is not intended to be buried in Lille, or elsewhere. It tracks prostitution wherever it is. It attacks in Lille rmontrer it does not distinguish Powerful guilty of those Misérables.



It is a civil plaintiff in the case of Carlton, as no doubt other organizations. Now legal action against persons is part of the process of associative life balance sheet at year-end that justifies the granting or renewal of grants.



Rather than simply an educational action or agitprop for women, The EACP refuses to submit to the wisdom of the judiciary. It has its own legal political line.



When judges make their removal order to the Tribunal, the prosecution objects. The last word must go to the judges instructions. In this case, they will override. Mr. Strauss-Kahn will go to court.



This is usually the legal debate.



Except that in this case, after the application of dismissal of the prosecution before the order for reference, the EACP addressed a memorandum to the judges to tell them his refusal of closure of the case. She asked the judges to send Dominique Strauss-Kahn to the criminal court for "pimping" and "concealment of pimping."





This requires the benefit of a judiciariste hard and why not a relentless desire to defend the widow and the orphan oppressed, ie prostitutes, women, planête etc..



This is just not that simple.



9) - Mr. Charpenel, First Advocate General at the Court of Cassation



This association is one of those organizations that serve to hedge the intervention of multiple forces that can intervene ex-officio. It may be foreign powers and executive networks.



It is clear that:

a-The President of the association ensures the presence of the U.S. Administration.



b-The Vice President led the judicial policy of some of the top French judiciary, and beyond. This is Mr. Charpenel, high magistrate, First Advocate General at the Court of Cassation. View Postscript.



In the organization of the association, it is only "the Deputy" of the President. In fact, the day when the judges make public the reference correctional Strauss-Khan is Mr. Charpenel who speaks publicly. It does on TV, it means that it is committed body and soul completely.



This political faction campaigning to force the French government to adopt the law of the party devotee of the 17th century. Today, these are the rules of the U.S. administration, then say puritanical rules.



EACP The association is a dependency of a political faction of the Judiciary and relay power influence of the U.S. government.



This gives a singular resonance maneuvers of this association.



1 - Mr. Charpenel is a judge of the Supreme Court, so the national level. This, already, he can not ignore.



When Mr. Charpenel door to the front of the order of judges and against the indictment of the prosecution, it can not ignore the fact that not only produces an associative opinion. He brings to the judges under the guise of an association supporting at least a portion of the Upper Bench.





It does not just provide its expertise and prestige to an association. He had the opportunity to make statements that would not have placed the judges under an obligation to confront the Prime prosecutor of the Court of Cassation, or to make them.



In confronting the prosecutor Lille instead of let the judges according to the procedure, he committed an act of judicial authority and not merely associative pugnacity.



We will never know the impact of memory in the judges' decision. However, it is undeniable that it casts doubt on the independence of judges after the receipt of this letter.



The concept of corruption can legitimately be called to examine the report of the investigating judges in memory they received co-chaired by Mr. Charpenel association.



Appear on television to give his ideas of moral authority vested in the office of High magistrate is one thing.



In the office of a judge, the only legal judicial interventions are those produced by the procedure. For example, interventions attorney Républiqiue.



Use the corner of a civil party to impose judicial intervention of a judge of the superior levels hérarchiquement may well be likened to a maneuver of corruption or intimidation.



2 - Mr. Charpenel can not ignore either by taking a public stand against the prosecution indictment to the order of magistrates, he defends a particular judicial policy online. It divides the judiciary outside court. It carries the political division of the public land policy fights. Whatsoever.



It is worth to him for all. The political struggle in the field of judicial decisions, pending or final, can not be challenged anyone.



When the Supreme Court erects Sharia law enforceable in companies, judges of this Court have the same approach as in the case of Mr. Charpenel Carlton. Republicans are right to oppose it politically. Notwithstanding the fact that they are not judges.







Judges do not make their decisions because of the laws but make their decisions during a redefinition of the law. This is the installation of political struggle are-quality legal proceedings.



3 - Mr. Charpenel can no longer ignore that memory takes the place of government action.



The combination of front sends a threatening notice to judges. For them to do what they want. Either they are running and they are worthy of the name judges. Either they depart and they are infamous.

While we are here and curse, curse, moral obligation. The system is installed, it is proof of the usual discretion new subtly taking place of the old.



However, this call sent by an association with judges for a dismissal of Strauss-Kahn correctional against demand of dismissal made by the Prosecutor of the Republic takes place exactly the instructions of the Guard Seals the parquet for individual cases.



a-one can say whether this appeal judges conditioned their decision. The fact of the call is established.

b-The call comes when the Minister of Justice is called an instruction, directive, order.



The only difference is precisely that of the legality of one by its integration with the procedure and the clear legality of another.



This can only be a court injunction by its desire to impose a legal characterization of the acts and the person who signs it and at the same time it looks like the memory of an association plaintiff.



Where to begin the trick, where finished dishonesty?



10) - Public Instruction judges

What is it?



Since the First Consul, the Attorneys General could go to Flooring for any individual case, the instructions that the prescribed mandatory conduct.



The Ministers are left go to use this ability in ways so vile that these instructions have become the symbol of the dictatorship of the Executive Branch of the Judiciary.

The corporatist state have used their infamies to organize a mobilization against the Poujadist Policy guilty of interference and provocation inequality before the law.



Examples of this manipulation Poujadist against the republican form of the State of heinous acts by the use of frames is growing.



Thus dsormais:

a-The right of Grace is said to be a monarchical survival. While it is an area of ​​critical dialogue between the People and Justice. Justice has never been more unequal and unjust since castration of this right.

b-Access to justice is paying. The private practice of public justice will follow. Again, this is an excuse to abuse the judges deliberately let him. This is a terrible blow to the equality of all before the law.



Since Ms. Guigou, successive Ministers of Justice have made it a point of honor to give up their right to intervene with the prosecution in individual cases. So-called "instructions" to the prosecution.



Under the guise of ending the practice instructions of convenience or otherwise dependent, or common policies, this provision allows litigants only dealing with the judiciary, without recourse to the elected authorities, executive or legislative.



With practice instructions to the prosecution, the First Consul had made sure that it is the national power that gives the national political perspective in the composition of a criminal record. He was allowed to change the terms, for example to make them public.



Removing them, the Executive Branch has left the field open to those who have the means to intervene in the composition of a file prior to the release in court. This is not something other than privatization of more than justice.



The approach of the association "Action Teams against pimping," civil party in the case of Carlton Lille, shows that voluntary castration from the executive branch does not eliminate the interference in the affairs director individual legal and it moves.



This "instruction" then take place. It is not the fact of power democratically elected for this purpose. She is now due to what is commonly called the lobbies.





11) - The private instruction to judges

Mr. Charpenel proceeds by the memory under the guise of a combination of front, to the substitution of a private school in regal Instruction



The operation can grow without fear of contradicting the Minister. The government has abandoned its powers. Mr. Charpenel occupies the land abandoned by the state. His association denies the dismissal and qualifies offenses.

He does not give his instructions to the Prosecutor. What for? The quality of civil association can apply directly to the judges decision.



12) - The complicity Manoeuvrist

This harassment has its own aims and prohibitionists against Strauss-Kahn. It also has the purpose of protecting the crime of Mr. Sarkozy.



Mr. Charpenel can not ignore:

a-Sexual Crime paid to Mr Sarkozy by Dr. William which he necessarily read the book, like all managers concerned.

b-The opening of a preliminary investigation made by an ordinary citizen demand.



However, while possible prostitution and rape of a member, the alleged pimping Mr Sarkozy, devraiten carry forward, he does not intervene. He did not say a word.



This silence is not sharing networks omerta French managers concerned. It is the judicial guarantee.



Mr. Charpenel produces memory, confrontation with the public prosecutor concerned, the risk of discussing a potential corruption to:

a-Harassing Mr. Strauss-Kahn

b-forward for the purposes of its prohibitionist activity to criminalize prostitution and clients.

c-Provide legal guarantee mute the omerta enjoyed Mr. Sarkozy.



Everyone noticed that these three objectives are also those sought by the U.S. Administration.



Mr. Charpenel, a distinguished as the first General Counsel to the Supreme Court authority highlights in a legal battle ruthless, uncompromising, against all practices of prostitution, regardless of social status or state customer.







Everyone understands that if Mr. Charpenel not expressed on civil charges against Mr. Sarkozy is that they have no legal basis. Managers also understand that it is better to believe.



Keeping silent on the matter Sarkozy, who is at least the issues raised by the book Mrs. William, he set up a political system that is mobilizing against Strauss-Khan and installation policy prohibition, the intimidating towards disqualification requests to open a preliminary investigation against Mr. Sarkozy.



Silently, intervention in a case is on the other, and vice versa in turn.



12) - Prohibition and the United States

Why the interests of Mr. Charpenel, Top French magistrate, they intersect those of the U.S. government?





Mr. Charpenel can claim a political virginity. It owes its brilliant promotions to its presence in the Cabinets of Attorneys General.



Mr. Charpenel is not an individual, it is a coterie of the judiciary, political environments fraction of executives, the representative of a current.



First it leads a political struggle. His line is the public policy of prohibition.



It is not there to defend the prostitutes against the outrages they suffer but to prohibit their trade and criminalize their customers. As for alcohol in the United States in 1920 and the drug today.



Strauss-Kahn is a character of the legality of the Criminal Code under the Civil Code. He may need to violate the court will tell. He does not change. It is the customer. It could possibly recognized as pimp. It does not leave articles of the Penal Code taught by faculty.



Therefore, Mr. Strauss-Kahn is the ideal of a prohibitionist policy object. U.S. demand for ratonade this framework, the green light that is for any public action do the rest.









13) - Parallel rights

On what is the distinction he draws between sexual practices Strauss-Kahn and Mr Sarkozy? Why-you vituperates it together and it is silent about the others?



If the words of Mrs. William is correct, Mr. Sarkozy is not a character of law as defined by the Penal Code under the Civil Code. It seeks to create a new one.



He did not call a bitch, he creates it. He did not fuck, he rapes her. It is pimp to pay the IRS. It does not suck by a prostitute, he puts the Parliament on his knees before the Executive. Etc..



All this activity is conceivable that if we admit the existence of a right to Parallel law of the Civil Code. Mr Sarkozy is the creator of law in the sense that religions, customs, mafias, are creative of law. These parallel rights are outside the scope of natural law.



The criminal activity attributed to Mr. Sarkozy does not apply to the organization of naughty nights. It aims to use the public right to curl up with a parallel right understanding and practice are available only to insiders administration and privileged.



But Mr. Charpenel policy also aims to create a parallel law. It organizes the action to impose a policy of prohibition, American, distinct from the French law.



No one can ignore the fact that the prohibition is the alliance of government and private mafias. It is the policy by which the U.S. impose their policing of the world. The case of the French connection by which the President of the Republic Georges Pompidou was imposed on the American police guardianship is in everyone's memory.



From this prohibition, Mr. Charpenel wants to introduce into French law of American confusion between customers and pimps, rape and sexual service, payment and servitude, etc..



This is only one aspect of a fight judicial policy to confuse accidents and crimes, to identify juvenile crime in the major, to criminalize the daily life pattern of twist brought to others, etc..







The legal basis for this judicial activity is the supremacy of law over the law of the Regulation on the law, the Court of Parliament, statutory bodies, trade unions, for example, on the courts. Beyond that, it is the superiority of the regulation of its proceedings on the law, the legal status of personal freedom, etc..



Mr. Charpenel probably do not recognize the rape of the member. By cons, it sees no obstacle to a lowering of Parliament, elected in favor of the state administration.



In the same way that the treaty says Mercosy replaces the Parliament by the Court of Auditors in the audit of the nation prohibitionist judges do not see malice replacement of Parliament not the administration in determining the rights of citizens. The Tribunal is then supposed to correct administrative errors and create the right.



It is for this reason that psychiatry (adminsitration, doctors, nurses) have obtained the appearance before the Court because of detention be extended to 15 days. They take care of the rights of detainees.



It is not that the Court reject first. It is right under the Civil Code.

This ensures that every citizen can be held without appearing before a judge. But this involves recognizing the prisoner as a citizen. It is precisely this legal channel refuse unionists.



This refusal is also based on the opposition of a parallel right to public law. Psychiatric staff feel they are the natural defenders of the rights of mentally ill prisoners. Hence, they substitute discreetly but firmly to the right of the Civil Code protection law called paternal, ie feudal.



By a natural movement, Mr. Sarkozy and Mr. Charpenel includes silent. They both share the same legal battles.



Certainly, we can see things differently. But then we must explain the reasons for the silence on the matter Charpenel Mr. Sarkozy. In any case, he can not justify his silence by ignorance or strangeness in relation to its object.



14) - On behalf of whom?

This difference in legal treatment between public and business Balladur, Sarkozy and Strauss-Kahn is insanity. Whatever the final decisions of judges.



The fact that the French network executives recognize a droit de seigneur Sarkozy on French and especially their elected representatives should not infer that the judges have to lie to this adversity.

I requested the opening of a judicial inquiry. This procedure was initiated for similar or less serious in the case of persons of similar rank state.



When Mr. prosecutor requested a hearing of Mr. Salomone, the police who sabotaged the hearing and could not take place.



The question is simple: on whose behalf Mr. Sarkozy could he exercise any personal crime, which is considered a more serious now, without having to meet the judges, regardless of their other decisions?



I am a worker, I take my responsibilities. Magistrates and officers of the State to take theirs.



Please accept, Mr. prosecutor, the assurance of my highest consideration,



Marc Salomone









PS: Association against child prostitution

http://www.acpe-asso.org/blog/2010/11/15/nouveau-president-pour-la-fondation-scelles/

"Yves Charpenel is Advocate General at the Court of Cassation in Paris since 2005. Previously, he served as Attorney General, Director of Criminal Affairs and Pardons, an expert in international and European organizations including organized crime. He is Director of the John and Jane Scelles Foundation since 2007 and Vice-President of "Action Teams against pimping", an association founded in 1956 by Jean Scelles.La Foundation Jean and Jeanne Scelles acts as a national resource center and internationally on all aspects of human trafficking for sexual exploitation. She leads with her in favor of abolishing the system of prostitution partners, an advocacy to better inform the public, the public and private decision on the best actions may discourage demand, fight against traffickers and help victims. "

Aucun commentaire: