Did the United States of America err in not granting a juris prudential exception

QUESTIONS PRESENTED QUESTION NUMBER ONE: Did the United States of America err in not granting a juris prudential exception. See 28 U.S.C §§ 1291, 1292 in order to avoid having to consider the following, which would necessarily obligate another set of Congressional Hearings akin to the Church Hearings in 1973 whereby the CIA had to omit the existence of MK-Ultra? Which it declared abandoned. ANSWER TO QUESTION NUMBER ONE: With regards to Estaban Santiago (Mass-Shooter at the Ft. Lauderdale Airport), for which this AMICUS BRIEF was filed; and other Mass-Shooters that have made similar claims of being victims of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control with a history of Military Training Are their CONSITUTIONAL RIGHTS TO DUE PROCESS BEING COMPROMISED and Should the following not be GRANTED? 1. VICTIMS OF U.S. SPONSORED MIND CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES OPERATED BY OPERATIVES, AGENCIES, AND OR IN DIRECT PARTNERSHIP WITH UNITED STATES MILITARY, LAW ENFORCEMENT AND OR INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES OR INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATIVE ARE ENSURED THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS 2. ARE AFFORDED THE PROPER ADMINISTRATION OF LAW IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIER ACTIONS, AND IF SUCH ACTIONS ARE DEEMED PROXY TO THEIR HANDLERS, OR CONTROLERS, AND THEY ARE GRANTED THE PROPER IMMUNITIVE DEFENSES DURING CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS BY UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS, STATE ATTORNEYS, AND OR LOCAL MAGISTRATES. 3. THAT ANY AND ALL SUCH DIAGNOSIS OF MENTAL ILLNESSES ARE FIRST DEEMED TO BE SYMPTOMATIC OF U.S. SPONSORED MIND CONTROL FIRST, AND TREATMENTS ARE TO ENSURE THAT VICTIMS ARE PREPARED FOR A SAFE LIFE AND ASSURED THEY ARE NOT A THREAT TO SOCIETY. 4. THAT LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES AND LOCAL POLICE ARE TO BE ADVISED OF SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES AND ARE PROHIBITED FROM TARGETING AND OR SURVEILLING THE VICTIMS IN ANY WAY. 5. THAT HEARING VOICES AND SUCH RELATED SYMPTOMS ARE NOT TO BE USED FOR MENTAL HEALTH WARRANTS AND OR HOSPITALIZATIONS ALONE WHITHOUT A THORUGH ANALYSIS OF THIER CLAIS OF SUFFERING SYMPTOMS OF U.S. SPONSORED MIND CONTROL. 6. IN THE 1990'S THEN PRESIDENT WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON MADE PUBLIC STATEMENTS AND APPOLOGIES FOR PROGRAMS USING AMERICAN CITIZENS AS NON-CONSENSUAL EXPERIMENTEES. SUCH PUBLIC DISCLOSURES, AT SOME POINT IN TIME, SHOULD BE ADDRESSED BY THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION OF VICTIMS OF U.S. SPONSORED MIND CONTROL. U.S. SUPREME COURT PETITION OF CERTORARI Page No. 4 of 77 Saturday November 10, 2018 TO-THE U.S. SUPREME COURT From THE ELVENTH CIRCUIT Case No. 18-10134, by Stan J. Caterbone, Pro Se QUESTION NUMBER ul Is PRO SE PETITIONER sta CATERBONE, his father Samuel P. Caterbone, Jr., and his brother Samuel A. Caterbone VICTIMS OF U.S. SPONSORED MIND CONTROL TECHNOLOGIIES who Suffered Incidents and Violations of Civil, Constitutional Rights of Non-Consensual Experimentation paramount to TORTURE? 1. ANSWER TO QUESTION NUMBER TWO: YES. QUESTION NUMBER THREE Did PRO SE PETITIONER STAN J. CATERBONE fall victim to a CRIMINAL/CIVIL Conspiracy while engaging in Whistle-blowing Activities in the ISC/CIA International Arms Dealer Scandal in 1987 which continues to today that now has manifested into a cover-up and obstruction of justice case of mass proportions. 2. ANSWER TO QUESTION NUMBER THREE: YES. U.S. SUPREME COURT PETITION OF CERTORARI Page No. 5 of 77 Saturday November 10, 2018 TO THE U.S. wy COURT From THE ELVENTH CIRCUIT Case " 18-10134, by Stan J. Caterbone, Pro Se