Post is pinned.Post has attachment

Post has attachment

Post has shared content
Thought we'd share some of our favorite #MondayMotivation with you. Be sure to follow us on Instagram for more daily tips and inspiration!
Photo

I want to Be a rich man, i am still seaching for way. 

The Truth! They all ways try to hide or shelter the TRUTH. Why is this???
https://youtu.be/HVw81sQ1UMM

Elections do NOT get rigged in a great or free country. 

Post has shared content
2LEGAL ACTION CONTINUES.
Prosecutors Misconduct Maded The Resulting Conviction a Danial Of Due Process That Seriously affected the Fairness, Integrity or Public Reputation of Judicial Proceedings in this Case.
The Trial Court Denied Randy His Fundamental Right to A Fair Trial By Jury. With Giving Jury Instructions That Were Confusing and Incomplete on Essential Elements of The Charge Crime and Lesser- Included Offense Under Miss. Statutory Laws. Under The Due Process Clause it Requires Prosecution to Prove Beyond A Reasonable Doubt Every Element Of The Crime With Which a Defendant is Charged By The Grand Jury In Indictment. These Errors Violated Randy Right Under The U.S.CONST. Amend. 5th,6th,14th,. Contrary to Clearly Established Federal Law as Determined by The U.S.Supreme Court. See Written Law, (Screws v.U.S.,325 U.S.91,65 S.Ct. 1031(1945),In re Winship,397,U.S.358,364,90 S.Ct.1068(1970),Patterson v.New York, 432,U.S.197,210(1977), Sandstorm v.Montana, 442 ,U.S.510,99 S.Ct.2450(1979),Sullivan v.Louisiana, 508 U.S.275,113 S.Ct. 2078(1993),Neder v.U.S.,527 ,U.S.1,8,119 S.Ct.1827(1999),Middleton v.McNeil, 124 S.Ct.1830(2004) and Miss. Const. Art. 3,Sec. 31(1890).
Trial Defense Counsel Deprived Randy Right to Effective Assistance of Counsel, That Denied Randy, Due Process to A Fair Impartial Jury Trial, By Counsel Using Racial Comments during Voir Dire regarding Prejudice White Prospective Jurors. This Racial Influence had affects on the Jury to dislike Randy and His Trial Counsel who Were Both Black Males.Trial Counsel failed to do an Investigation By Preparing For Randy a Insanity Defense with His Medical Records. Under Miss. U.R.C.C.C. Rule 9.07 Adopted Fed.R.Crim. P.Rule 16, 21A.M.Jur.2d.Crim.Law 50. Trial Counsel failure to Have Subpoena issue for various Witnesses to Be Present at Trial to testify in Randy Defense, Trial Counsel Failure To have The Victim's Gun Pistol disclosed to Jury on the grounds of Justifiable Homicide In defense that would have shown unto Jurors the Imminent Danger being designed by The Victim at the Time Randy Pull the Trigger. This Exculpatory Evidence if disclosed would have Changed the outcome of the trial proceedings as to Guilt or Punishment of a reasonable doubt.It also would have Impeached State Witnesses Testimony .Trial Counsel Were Ineffective by Failure to adequately investigate Mississippi Crime Laboratory,With Non-Existing State Medical Examiner and Dr.Hayne not Being a Board Certified Forensic Pathology As A Unreliable Expert Witness. Trial Counsel failed To have Randy Statement suppressed as involuntary given to police. Coercion While Randy was under mental disorder and intoxication doing Questioning. Trial Counsel Ineffective Assistance of deficient performance prejudice Trial Outcome. In Violation of The U.S.CONST. Amend. 5th,6th,14th,(Contrary to Clearly Established Federal Law as Determined By The U.S.Supreme Court. See Written Law, Gideon v.Wainwright, 372,U.S.344-45(1963)
Strickland v.Washington, 466 U.S.668,104 S.Ct.2052(1984),Williams v.Taylor, 529 U.S.362,396-99(2000),Cullen v.Pinholster, 131 S.Ct.1388,1410(2011),
Harrington v.Richter,131 S.Ct.770,792(2011),Lafler v.Cooper,132 S.Ct. 1376(2012).
Randy Court Appointed Direct- Appeal Counsel Deprived Him Of A Fair Appeal Procedural that Prejudice His Appeal Outcome due to Financial Reason of Counsel Underfunded By The Madison County Public Defender's Office.See,
(27 A.M.J.Crim. L.13(1999),
74Miss.L.J.213(2004).Appellate Counsel Were Ineffective by Failure To Investigate Randy Case, Failed to raise Other non- frivolus Merit issues that appears in trial records,Counsel Failed to submit a supplemental briefing on behalf of Randy After Randy, being denied to do so. Randy had Advised Appeal Counsel of Other constitutional Issues that Deprived Him of A Fair Trial, but Counsel would not Assist Randy in Arguing These issues On Direct Appeal. After Miss.Supreme Court Justices Denied Randy To Proceed With His Supplemental Briefing, See, denied orders dated (8/9/00,10/3/00).That Violated Randy Due Process of Law Under Miss. Const. Art. 3,Sec. 26(1890)See Miss. Legislation limited to Compensation Appointed Counsel $500. FOR Representation on Appeal. (74 Miss. L.J.213(2004),78Miss. L.J.69(2008),Randy Right To Effective Assistance Of Appeal Counsel Were Deprived Under U.S.CONST. Amend. 5th,6th.14th,Contrary To Clearly Established Federal Law As Determined By The U.S.Supreme Court. (See Written Law. Anders v.California, 386, U.S.738(1967),Douglas v.California, 372 U.S.353(1963),U.S.v.Cronic
466 U.S.648(1984),Evitts v.Lucey,469 U.S.387(1985),McFarland v.Scott,512 U.S.1256-57(1994),Smith v.Robbins, 528 U.S.259,120 S.Ct.746(2000),Bell v.Cone,535 U.S.685,697-98(2002)
Randys Right were Denied By The Mississippi Supreme Court TO Due Process and Equal Protection of The Laws, Regarding The New Procedural Rights On Direct Appeal to File (Pro Se Supplemental Briefing) Under Miss. R.App.Proc. Rule 6,28 Amended Effective August 2,2012. That Applies To Miss. Const. Art. 3,Sec.14 ,Art. 3,Sec. 26.In Violation Of The U.S.CONST. Amend. 5th,6th,14,(Contrary to Clearly Established Federal And State Law as Determined by The Mississippi and U.S.Supreme Court's. (See Written Law, Smith v.Robbins, 528 U.S.280-81,120 S.Ct. 746(2000),Lindsey v.State, 939 so.2d.743(2005).
The Mississippi Supreme Court Also, Denied Randy His Right Under A NEW Change In Law That retroactivity Applies To Trial By Jury. Under Miss.Code. Ann.97-3-21(2),(S.B.2377), (2013). A Jury New Sentencing Proceedings That Was Previously Unavailable at the Time Of Randy 1999 Jury Trial. A Second Degree Murder Penalties of 20-40Years.However, At The Time of Randy Jury Trial There Were No "Minimum Sentence " Only One Sentencing Given By A Judge That Life Imprisonment. A Different Sentence is Appropriate.Under The New Change In Law. (See, The New Sentencing Reform Act Of 1984. Finding Sentencing Guidelines Advisory rather than Mandatory, Under U.S.v.Booker, 543 U.S.220,245-46(2005). Reversing application of Judicial Factfinding When Sentencing guidelines were Mandatory. See ,
Gall v.U.S.,552 U.S.38,49-50(2007),Dillon v.U.S.130 S.Ct.2683(2010),Pepper v.U.S.,131 S.Ct.1229,1241(2011).
Randy Submits his Trial Transcripts Has Errors of Omissions Of Certain Trial Proceedings That Hinders Randy Legal Right in Courts Of Law, unfairness done By Stenography Court Reporter, In Violation of Due Process And Equal Protection Under,
Fed. R.Civ.P.Rule 80. Adopted By Miss. R.Civ.P.Rule 80.(See STATE OF MISSISSIPPI V.RANDY DALE (DELL ) JACKSON ,CASE No.3148(February 22,23, 1999) Unfair Public Jury Trial Held In Canton, Mississippi of Madison County. For Other Cases Filings (See Direct- Appeal in Mississippi Supreme Court Case Jackson v.State, 784 So.2d.180(Miss.2001),Post-Conviction Relief Motion No.2002-M-1649(10/2/02),No.2008-M-1508(9/30/08,)(4/11/11), ,(5/14/14),(11/19/14),No.2014-M-00934(2/15/15)
IN THE U.S.DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI ,WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS PETITIONS ,Jackson v.Epps, No.3:03-cv-270-WHB-AGN(2003),No.3:07-cv-625-HTW-LRA(2007),No.3:09-cv-117-HTW-LRA (2009),Jackson v.Waller,No.3:14-cv-485-HTW-LRA (2014),Jackson v.Fisher,No.3:15-cv-TSL-LRA (2015).
IN THE U.S.COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT (COA ),
Jackson v.Epps, No.04-60442(2004),In Re, Randy Dale Jackson, No.05-61007(2005) ,No.07-60967(2007),No.09-60338(2009),Jackson v.Waller, No.14-60683(2014),In Re, Randy Dale Jackson, No.15-60663(2/11/16). FAILURE TO PRESUMPTION OF CORRECTNESS WITH RELEASE ORDER WILL RESULT IN FUNDAMENTAL MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE.
WHEN A JUDGE FAILS TO ENFORCE THE LAWS AND CONSTITUTIONS OF THE UNITED STATES,HIS/ HER ACTION VIOLATES THEIR OATH OF DUTIES, UNDER LAW THAT CAUSES MANIFEST ABUSE OF DISCRETION AND BIAS. SEE FEDERAL LAW, 42 U.S.C.A.1981(a) (c),(1991).42 U.S.C.A.1985(2),(3)(1980),18 U.S.C.A.242.
Under ARTICLE II,SEC.1,AND VI CONSTITUTION OF BILL OF RIGHTS , Its Provides, This Constitution, and The Law Of The United States Which Shall Be Made In Pursuance thereof;And All Treaties Made, Or Which Shall Be Made Under The Authority Of The United States, Shall Be The Supreme Law Of The Land;And The Judges In Every State Shall Be Bound Thereby, Anything in The Constitution Or Laws Of Any State To The Contrary Notwithstanding.
Therefore, Accordingly ,These, Legal Errors Listed Herein Causes MR.RANDY DALE JACKSON TO BE UNLAWFULLY HELD IN CUSTODY , IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTIONS,LAWS OR TREATIES OF THE UNITED STATES.See 28 U.S.C.1651,28 U.S.C.2241(c) ,(3), 28 U.S.C.2254(a) ,(d) (1),(2), (e) Miss.Code. Ann. 11-43-1(2011),Miss.Code. Ann. 99-39-5 .,Miss. R.Civ.P.Rule 60 (b) 1-6,Adopted Fed.R.Civ. P.Rule 60 (b) 1-6. Remedy For Injunction Release From Custody. Under Due Process and Equal Protection Of The Laws Violations.
I ,RANDY DALE JACKSON, DECLARE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY THAT THE FOREGOING IS TRUE AND CORRECT, SO HELP ME GOD.

Post has shared content
1Legal Action
Greeting:My Brother ,Mr.Randy Dale Jackson IN MISSISSIPPI, Is Petitioning Under The First Amendment Of The United States Constitution For A Commutation Of Sentence , Clemency Or Pardon,(Pursuant To Mississippi Constitution Ann.Art.5,Sec.123,124(1890). And Under Parole Eligibility Mississippi Code Ann.47-7-3(1),(3),(4)Miss. Law (1999).Made Applicable Under UNITED STATES PUBLIC LAWS 110-199 April 9,2008,122 Stat.657.Congress-Second Session "SECOND CHANCE ACT OF 2007 REENTRY OF OFFENDERS.However, "RANDY IS A FIRST TIME OFFENDER". Requesting A Second Chance To His Rights To Due Process Of Law For (Freedom) Liberty, After having Made A Mistake In Life That Led To A Wrongful Jury Conviction.RANDY, ALSO NEEDS PRO BONO LEGAL ASSISTANCE OF ANY COUNSEL TO FILE PETITIONS ,REGARDING His ISSUE'S OF "BEING HELD IN UNLAWFULLY CUSTODY IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTIONS AND LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES. See, THE FACTS and HISTORY OF RANDY'S UNFAIR RACIAL PROFILE CASE: Mr.Randy Dale Jackson, Criminal Case arise From A Movie He Played In back in 1995-96 ,Filmed in Canton Mississippi, (A Time To Kill) .The part he Played Were Fighting and Throwing down The Grandwizard of The Ku Klux Klan (kkk) .For a Clear Video Footage See(A Time To Kill) Movie T.V.Broadcasting from 48hours By Dan Rather. Hereafter, In 1997,Randy was set- up to be killed.ACCORDINGLY PRIOR TO THE SHOOTING, The Victim told Randy Somebody had paid Him to kill Him. The Victim then Threaten and Violently attacked Randy at gunpoint. Thereafter , at the time of the shooting The Victim Saw Randy Looking Out The Window started reaching for his gun In Pocket, That's when Randy Pulls the Trigger on His gun and It Shot Him. A White Woman who Became A Witness For The State was made To Lie at Trial to Cover up The Facts That Victim Did Not have a Gun. The Chief Investigator in This Case who Was A White Man from Madison County Sheriff Department was Bias Against Randy, by falsifying His Report Stating This is A (Murder Case) Before Randy were ever Indicated By A Grand Jury For Murder.He also Falsified Others Witnesses Statements, and Tampered With Evidence. In 1998,Randy Wrote The FBI in Jackson, Mississippi, Regarding Him being Treated Unfair by The Madison County Court Judge Revoking His Bond . In 1999,RIGHT Before RANDY'S Trial, Randy tried to Plea guilty to the lesser included offense of Manslaughter, but His Plea was rejected by the Court Judge BIAS during the plea proceedings.(Judges Impartiality Reasonably Question Under. 28 U.S.C.144,455(1999), Liteky v.U.S.,510 U.S.540,555(1993) That Deprived His Due Process Right Under (FED.R.CRIM.P.Rule11(C )(5)(B ).The Right To Withdraw Plea After Judge Rejection. In Which, The Victim' s Family Members had Agreed for Randy to plead guilty To MANSLAUGHTER as for Him accepting His Responsible for the shooting. Thereafter, Randy was made to go to Trial With A Tainted Jury (not of His Peers) ,All The Black African American Males Were Excluded From Being Juror's.As, Randy ,Being A African American Black Male Himself.Other Black Males as Witnesses were denied Their Right's To give full Testimony regarding the Victim's Violent acts. The Trial Court also Denied Randy His Right to Submit Evidence of A Black Male Witness Statement to The Juror's That Were the Only Material Evidence Showing The Prior Violent act against Randy by Victim prior to the shooting. The Trial Court also errored by Withholding and failure to Disclose the Victim's gun during Trial and during The Jury Verdict Deliberation.The Trial Court also Errored By Allowing A Non- License Forensic Medical Examiner to Testify As An Forensic Expert Witness Dr.Steven Hayne.Notwithstanding His Incomplete Autopsy Report From The Mississippi Then Inadequate Crime Laboratory. The Trial Court also Allowed Misconduct By The Prosectors,To Deprive Randy a Fair Trial. By Using, Improper Remarks and False Statements regarding The Law during Closing Arguments to Mislead and Influence The Jury to Only reach a Guilty Verdict for Murder. The Trial Court also Errored by Giving Jury Instructions That Were Confusing and Incomplete Regarding The Charged Offense and The Lesser- Included Offenses. Randy's Trial Counsel Was Negligent For failure To Investigate Certain facts of The case ,By failure To prepare an Insanity Defense Of ( RANDY'S Medical Records) The failure To Subpoena Other Witnesses, and The Failure to have the Trial Court to Come Forward With Exculpatory Evidence Of The Victim's Gun, in RANDY'S Defense, That Would have Shown The Victim Did Possess a Gun.This Physical Disclosure of Victim Gun Would have Shown unto Juror's the Imminent Danger being Design by Victim at the time Randy Pulled The Trigger. Randy's Counsel Also failed To Challenge and Investigate the fact that Mississippi did not have a Medical Examiner Qualified as a Expert in Forensic Pathology, Including The Showing of State Crime Laboratory inadequate (Backlog ) at the time Of RANDY'S Case in 1997, These factor Could have Shown Reasons For the Incomplete Of Autopsy Report. Along With Unreliable Non- Expert Witness Testimony. However,This Untrustworthy Material Should not Have Been Allowed To Be Admissible as Experts Evidence In The Trial Court. This Was Foreseeable Conspiracy By Trial Court To Deprived Randy of His Right To A Fair Trial By Jury. Randy's Counsel was Ineffective By using Racial Comments during Voir Dire against all White Prospective Jurors That Caused The 10 White Selected Jurors to Dislike And be Prejudiced in Their Minds Against Randy and His Counsel Before The Trial Ever Started. In 2000-01 ,Randy Right's To A Fair Direct- Appeal With Due Procedures In The Mississippi Supreme Court. Were Denied by The Justices.In not being Allowed to be fully Heard on Other legal Errors that were Present in the Trial Records, That Would have Reversed His Wrongful Jury Conviction, (see court orders In denying Randy Procedure Right To Submit A Supplemental Brief. Dated (8/9/00,10/3/00).Randy's Appeal Counsel also provided Ineffective Assistance of Counsel by failing to Raise or Argue Other Reversable Errors that were in The Records, after Being Advised By Appellate to protect His Interest On Appeal.Due to Randy Appellate Counsel being Underfunded By the Madison County Public Defenders Office This Caused Counsel To Render Randy Ineffective of Assistance on direct Appeal. Randy further submits His Trial Transcripts has errors and Omission of Certain Trial Proceedings That Took Place at Trial. These errors hindered Reviewing Court's from Seeing The Legal errors that Randy did not receive an fair Trial by Jury. This Unfairness was done by The Stenography Court Reporter, That Denied Randy His Due Process of Law Right to a correct Transcription of All Trial Proceedings. Accordingly, These Legal Errors Listed Herein above Causes Randy Dale Jackson To Be Unlawfully Held In Custody In Violation Of The Constitution and Laws Under The Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of The United States. THEREFORE, BASED ON THESE FACTS MR.RANDY DALE JACKSON DESERVES A SECOND CHANCE TO (FREEDOM) HIS LIBERTY RIGHT'S, UNDER FAIR AND EQUAL JUSTICE AS A MATTER OF LAW.(SEE HIS PAST CASE FILINGS THAT NEEDS FURTHER JUDICIARY REVIEW FROM MEMBERS OF THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS REGARDING THE ISSUE OF UNFAIR RACIAL INJUSTICE PROFILING ).(SEE Direct- Appeal (Jackson v.State, 784 so.2d 180 (Miss.2001) Mississippi Supreme Court, Post-Conviction No.2002-M-1649(10/2/02),
No.2008-M-1508(9/30/08),
(4/11/11),No.2014-M-934
(5/14/14),(11/19/14),(2/15/15).
The U.S.District Court For The Southern District Of Mississippi, Writ Of Habeas Corpus Petition, Jackson v.Epps, No.3:03-CV-270-WHB -AGN (2003),No.3:07-CV-625-HTW-LRA (2007),No.3:09-CV-117-HTW-LRA(2009),
JACKSON V.WALLER, No.3:14-CV-485-HTW-LRA (2014),
JACKSON V.FISHER,No.3:15-CV-654-TSL-LRA(2015)
THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT ,PETITIONS(COA ) JACKSON V.EPPS, No.04-60422(2004),
In Re:Randy Dale Jackson, No.05-61007(2005),
No.07-60967(2007),
No.09-60838(2009),
JACKSON V.WALLER, No.14-60683(2014), In Re: Randy Dale Jackson, No.15-60663(2/11/16). The IMPORTANCE OF THE QUESTIONS PRESENTED AND THE DIVERSITY OF VIEWS AMONG THE MISSISSIPPI SUPREME, THE U.S.DISTRICT AND THE U.S.APPEALS COURT'S, THAT HAVE CONSIDERED THE PROBLEM, WHERE SPECIFIC ALLEGATIONS BEFORE COURT ON RANDY 'S PETITIONS FOR FEDERAL WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS SHOW REASONS TO BELIEVE THAT RANDY MAY,IF FACTS ARE FULLY DEVELOPED, BE ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE HE IS CONFINED ILLEGALLY AND IS THEREFORE ENTITLED TO RELIEF, IT IS THE DUTY OF THE COURT'S TO PROVIDE NECESSARY FACILITIES AND PROCEDURES FOR ADEQUATE INQUIRY, AND IN EXERCISING THAT POWER COURT MAY UTILIZE FAMILIAR PROCEDURES,AS APPROPRIATE, WHETHER THESE ARE FOUND IN CIVIL OR CRIMINAL RULES OR ELSEWHERE.(SEE ) THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IS A FUNDAMENTAL INSTRUMENT FOR SAFEGUARDING INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS TO FREEDOM AGAINST ARBITRARY AND LAWLESS STATE (MISSISSIPPI) ACTION. ITS PRE-EMINENT ROLE IS RECOGNIZED BY THE ADMONITION IN THE CONSTITUTION THAT: 'THE PRIVILEGE OF WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS SHALL NOT BE SUSPENDED. ..U.S.CONST.,ART.I,s 9,cl.2.THE SCOPE AND FLEXIBILITY OF THE WRIT_ ITS CAPACITY TO REACH ALL MANNER OF ILLEGAL DETENTION_ ITS ABILITY TO CUT THROUGH BARRIERS OF FORM AND PROCEDURAL MAZES-HAVE ALWAYS BEEN EMPHASIZED AND JEALOUSY GUARDED BY COURTS AND LAWMAKERS. THE VERY NATURE OF THE WRIT DEMANDS THAT IT BE ADMINISTERED WITH THE INITIATIVE AND FLEXIBILITY ESSENTIAL TO INSURE THE MISCARRIAGES OF JUSTICE WITHIN ITS REACH ARE SURFACED AND CORRECTED. (See AMICUS CURIAE FOR FILING JURISDICTION UNDER, 28 U.S.C.A.1651,
28 U.S.C.2241, 28 U.S.C.2243,
And 28 U.S.C.2254. RANDY NEEDS LEGAL PETITION(S) FILED FROM ANY PRO BONO LEGAL SERVICES ORGANIZATION ,(PURSUANT TO MODEL RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCTS,RULE 6.1Pro Bono Public Service).

Post has attachment
You can join us in person or watch the webcast. I will be talking about our common constitutional heritage and renewal of what should bring us together. Please share and invite your friends.
https://www.facebook.com/events/626249064190810/

Post has attachment
Ping +Michael Ehline Curious to get your feedback as well others in your group :)
Wait while more posts are being loaded