How is it proper and legal for the court to state there were undisputed facts of physical-assault, threatening-behavior, physical-resistance, false-narrative, brady-violation

QUESTIONS PRESENTED , . 1. How is it proper and legal for the court to state there were undisputed facts of | ; . physical assault, threatening behavior, and physical resistance of Eric Westry against the police in the face of continuous objections disputing this false narrative for 1,984 (1 SEPTEMBER 2021) days counting—here and in other : | : courts—that Eric Westry did NOT assault his wife and was awakened by the pounding on the door just prior to being broken down by the police? , 2. How can assisting the police, reaching out toward the nearest officer to hand his child represented on the audio-video evidence with Mr. Eric Westry stating under duress “I am handing her to you” while other officers nonsensically were . pulling in the opposite direction, not cooperating or employing their requirement of reassessment of the threat continuum—BECAUSE THERE WAS NONE—be considered and misconstrued as being non compliant and threatening? ; 3. How is this false narrative not an invention of the police and state attorneys in oo the face of Maria Westry’s testimony under oath confirmed this vis-a-vis the acne on her face not representing slap marks? 4. Ifthere is no record of Mr. Eric Westry admitting to assaulting his wife (because he did NOT), in a dismissed case and no allocution why is it considered by the judges as no dispute to a victim services narrative that he assaulted his wife? : 5. Where are the pictures of these so-called slap marks if this were not a Brady Violation and conspiracy between police and prosecutors to claim injuries that were never photographed and documented in a file? ; ii : ~ ‘ . 6. How can the court decide that a cooperating father handing his daughter over to | the police, who then fire their weapon at both father and daughter not be considered culpable of excessive force and therefore still be in compliance with the rules granting qualified immunity? , . 7. Isn’t an issue of genuinely disputed facts, a matter for a jury to decide under the forgoing circumstances and not the district judge? : 8. Considering the forgoing, isn’t it true that under Rule 56 (c) the court should ; have denied summary judgment because the objection brief and video— . including facts falsely deemed undisputed within—are indicative that the non: movant is entitled to it? . iii