Question not identified

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED The issue here goes beyond a miscarriage of justice. It’s lower courts’ and it’s officers as such in this case District Attorney Matulewicz blatant and outright refusal to administer justice, when law warrants otherwise; it's contrary to what this court in Mitchum v. Foster, 407 U.S. 225, 240, (1972) proclaimed, "throws open the doors of the United States courts to those whose rights under the Constitution are denied or impaired", 1. When the doors of the U.S. Courts are willfully, maliciously, and improperly closed to noninfluential, self-represented persons, like the disabled petitioner thereby foreclosing (1) a civil forum of justice, and (2) denies petitioner his "day in court", simply because the fraudsters want to protect their own kind via abuse of power, does this court's refusal to intervene and foreclose a civil forum send a disturbing message that the "Las Vegas" kind massacre remains the only avenue for attention/justice? 2. How can a be also an adjudicator, and worse, be permitted on this court's watch, to corrupt the judicial process? The law ; profession is clearly incapable of policing its own kind