Question presented to the court

QUESTION PRESENTED TO THE COURT. Question presented to the court were factual and by nature of the crime alleged, a trial was warranted to guarantee public safety. By nature of the crime, electronic harassment, the guilty will engage in this crime because it is the one way to commit murder or any crime while staying hidden. , Attempted murder during a trial constitutes an attack on the whole legal system where this is supposed to be a discussion among civilized men. Attack on a prose litigant should be treated as an attack of same magnitude as attacking a lawyer who is preparing for a trial in search of restitution to the wrong done to someone. Failure to protect prose litigant during trial constitute a great disadvantage and a disservice to the legal system. The interest of the lower court should not be to defend or care about a criminal organization whose members attempted to kill and will likely try to kill again ina such a way that makes them feel invisible from the law. “The right to life is absolute and the lower court failed to affirm this. Death by suicide can be considered murder in some special instances especially where an active process is involved rather than a passive process. i PARTIES TO THIS PETITION Petitioner in this Court, plaintiff-appellant Peter C Benedith; was the Plaintiff in the district court and an appellant before the Ninth Circuit. He may also be referred BENEDITH or Plaintiff. Respondents are Cuyahoga County of OH, Department of Medicine at Metro Health : Medical Center Cleveland OH, Metro Health Medical Center Cleveland OH, and Case Western University Cleveland OH . Respondents are referred to as Defendants or Respondents. They were the defendants in the District Court and the Appellees in the Ninth Circuit Court. iv _ TABLES OF CONTENT . QUESTION ; PARTIES TO THE : TABLES OF , PETITION OF A WRIT OF OPINIONS RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE STATEMENT OF THE REASON FOR GRANTING THE The decision of the District Court which was affirm by the Ninth Circuit court conflicts with facts as documented in the court record. Fraud in court or appearance of fraud in court is not a good defense even if the charge is so trivial and would result in a fifty-cent penalty. The defendants failed to make any defense what will help promote or serve : the interest of justice. , oy TABLE OF AUTHORITY Statutes } } 7 } California Penal Code section 664/187 | California Penal Code Section 245(A)(1) , 18 USC 113 . 18 USC 1113 18 USC 1117 . 7 1 PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI : Peter C Benedith respectfully petitions for a writ of certiorari to review the judgement of the United States Court Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in this case. OPINION BELOW y The opinion of the Ninth Circuit is attached in