Did the petitioner call 911 in a mental state of emergency?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED [. Did +he petitioner catl 91 ina Mental State of MENREAZ 2. During the INVESTIGATION PHASE did defendant Sgt. Ben Jones) Violate the, Petitioner's Goad Semoriten IMMUNETY by arresting, drd tharging-+ne petitioner With criminat Offenses S-60[, and 5-619 ° ” 3. During the INVESTLGATION PHASE ,did deferdant(Sgt. Ben Sones) commit" perjury to Secure the Uarrants, and Srvest the petitioner for calling UW! by Stating he “ avers he retrieved control purchases from the residence ¢ relle buyerviolate the petitioner 4. During the JUDICIAL PHASE sdid defendant (TuPSE danielle Dux loners goad Sonoritan EMMUNETY thst was GRANTED at the’MotionS Hearing” by JUDGE G. Leasure,, by allowing Petitioner to be Subsequently prosecuted is ; 5, During #n@ LNVESTLEATION PHASE4did defendant ASA. Michele HanSenlviolate the petitioner’ Good Samaritan IMMUNITY by Charging, and Prosecuting Petition forthe Prohibit offenses , 5-Gol,and 5-619 2 . | 6.L£ the decedent (k.G.C.) Was found in passession of Narcotics in her bra. Pants pocket, and her Louis vutton purse (own effects), Could the Good samaritan be. charged for any drug Possession offenses, being locked out the apartment by the Deadbolt 7 7, WaS the LEGLSLATURE INTENT by passing the Good Samaritan Law(CP-| +210), Was for the Qi caller tobe protected from FALSE IMPRISONMENT for in‘Goad Faith’, seeking EMERGENCY PRONESION +o try to Save a Life? Or the LEGISLATURE INTENT by Passing the Goad SamBritan LAW Was for the I Caller to Still be Subsect to Srrest, Charges and prosecution for in"Good faith” Seeking EMERGENCY PROVESION to try to save 3 Life ¢ 8, Can the defendant's be alloued to maintain they IMMUNITY, even When they Thaseto Violate the IMMUNITY OF the 911 Caller (Petitionen by @rresting, Charging. and Seeking Prosecution ? 4. Was the deferdants|A.s.A. Michele Hansen . Sgt-Ben Sones y JUDGE Daniele Dwyer) in “DEFAULT ” by refusing to answer to the petitioners complaint within bo-days”’ thet was ORDERED’ by U5. District Court Tube Paula Xinus On 10/12/184and defendants didnt answer intill after petitioners MOTLON FOR DEFAULT JUDGEMENT on 12/26/18 T 10, Dib the petitioner experience Cruel and UNUSaUl Punishment when he Was held without Bord for YeMonths 45 3 Good Sawaritan, Petitioner had nO — Community 4and met ailthe Mitigating Factors for Bail release? | (2)