Free Statement - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :06-cv-00018-JJF Document 47 Filed 06/15/2007 Page 1 0f 2
CLERK OF THE COURTS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT 06-018-IJF
844 N.KING STREET DT-06-13- 07
JW
WILMINGTON,DELAWARE
SUPPORT OF SUMMARY
IUDGEMENT
THE DEFENDANTS
ARGUE THAT THEIR FORCED TAGKING OF EVIDENCE WAS ALLOWED
UNDER DELAWARE LAW. I HAVE ALWAYS MAINTAINED THAT EXCESSIVE
AND UNREASONABLE FORCE WAS USED. OF FENCIVE TOUCHING,ASSUALT
OR ASSUALT RESULTING IN INJURY ARE ALL DEEMED CRIMINAL
ACTS,THEREF ORE IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED EXCESSIVE AND
UNREASONABLE FOR THE POLICE TO BREAK THE LAW TO ENFORCE THE
LAW. DELAWARE LAW STATES THAT REASONABLE STAEPS CAN BE USED
TO OBTAIN EVIDENCE. REASONABLE STEPS DOES NOT CONSTITUTE
FORCE.
MCGOWAN VS
CITY OF SAN DIEGO STATES THAT THE DEGREE OF FORCE WHICH DOES
NOT SHOCK THE CONSCIENCE OF THE ORDINARY PERSON.
DELAWARE LAW
SAYS THAT IF A PERSON IS INFORMED OF THE LAW AND THAN REFUSES
THE POLICE CANNOT USE FORCE. WHAT IF A PERSON IS KNOWLEDGEABLE
OF THE LAW? WHAT IF A BAR CERTIFIED LAWYER REFUSES?
GEORGETOWN
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS,STATES ATTORNEY, AGREED TO MY CLAMS
THAT THE POLICE WHERE UNIUSTIFIED IN USING FORCE TO OBTAIN
EVIDENCE AND LET ME ENTER INTO AN FOP PLEA DEAL.
PERSONS WHO ARE
KNOWLEDGEABLE OF THE LAW AND REFUSE A CHEMICAL TEST SHOULD
BE AFFORDED THE SAME RIGHT TO THOSE THAT ARE INFORMED.
CCBRUCE HERRON RESPECTFULLY
VIA U.S MAIL ON 6—I3-07 ./
‘* N7 /~
n ,L KE
046,, xg- J-Jp __? 527 ALTI AVE
W H I BROOKLYN,MD 21225
1 {JUN 1 EQU`?
K ni EQ .,;€:¢¢¢.;<{....._
I . I ~.. @@1


Case 1 :O6—cv-OOO18—JJF Document 47 Filed 06/1 §;\20_Q_Z_ Page 2 0f 2
`?.7°‘
EQ QV :`*
cb
G J V
.5,; g
=.:>-·
ep @§
33 °‘
YJ e
N
S`,}
ph
#11
{E:
I,__I
bd';
F;
:25 E e w C ,
uk F § ·—C E
S Q §l Y?
H- s_· ?»“ Z U
E ____ Zi Us
é` L § Ed
_% JJ G C` g
5; V ww m é;
e @5* ·T v¤
“ gif
- ··¤ ai .3;
·—- 1. @ v Q
222” * ’