Whether white federal judges of the Eastern District of Missouri under color of Missouri laws willfully subjected petitioner based on his color and race to a deprivation of a constitutional right of equal protection

No question identified. : QUESTION _ PRESENTED , WHETHER WHITE FEDERAL JUDGES OF THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI UNDER COLOR OF MISSOURI LAWS WILLFULLY SUBJECTED PETITIONER BASED ON HIS COLOR AND RACE TO A_ DEPRIVATION OF A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT OF EQUAL PROTECTION OF MISSOURI LAWS (HASLER, TIMEUS, McQUEEN) AS WELL AS EIGHTH CIRCUIT LAWS (DENMON, ROSNOW). ‘ [ ] YES [ ]NO Il. WHETHER WHITE FEDERAL JUDGE RESPONDENT LIMBAUGH UNDER COLOR OF MISSOURI LAWS AGREED WITH WHITE STATE TRIAL JUDGES MARGARET M. NEILL AND MICHAEL K. MULLIN TO CONFER JURISDICTION IN THE CASE OF MISSOURI _V. HALL, NO. 0922-CR-01820-01 WHERE NONE EXISTED ACCORDING TO SCHAEFFER. []YES[]NO , | Il. WHETHER WHITE FEDERAL JUDGE RESPONDENT LIMBAUGH A FORMER MISSOURI SUPREME COURT JUDGE IN HIBLER IN 1999 AND COOPER IN 2007 UNDER COLOR OF MISSOURI LAWS WILLFULLY SUBJECTED PETITIONER BASED ON HIS COLOR AND RACE TO A DEPRIVATION OF HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHS TO DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL | PROTECTION OF THE LAWS SECURED OR PROTECTED BY THE ‘ | FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. [ ] YES [ ]NO | IV | WHETHER WHITE FEDERAL JUDGE RESPONDENT LIMBAUGH WHO WROTE THE OPINION OF MISSOURI LAW OF HIBLER WAS AWARE OF MISSOURI SUPREME COURT LAW McQUEEN IN 1955 AS FOLLOWED BY TURNAGE IN 1989 AND | BROWN IN 2000 OF A MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IN 2012. oo [ ] YES [ ]NO ; 2 WHETHER WHITE FEDERAL JDGE RESONDENTS LIMBAUGH, NOCE, AND ADELMAN KNEW THAT UNDER MISSOURI SUPREME COURT LAW TIMEUS IN 1911 THAT THE GRAND JURY INDICTMENT 0922-CR-1820-01 WAS LEGALLY INSUFFICIENT UNDER MISSOURI LAW (HASLER) AND EIGHTH CIRCUIT LAW (DENMON) BY FAILING TO STATE AN OFFENSE (ROSNOW) UNDER MISSOURI SUPRE,ME COURT RULE 23.01(b)2) CRIMINAL PROCEDURE BY OMMITTING AN_ ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF “KNOWINGLY” OF MISSOURI CRIMINAL STATUTE SUBSECTION 565.073.1(1) OF SECTION 565.073, RSMo (2000) SHALL HAVE THE SAME FORCE AND EFFECT OF LAW UNDER MISSOURI CONSTITUTION ARTILE V, SECTION 5. [ ] YES [ ]NO VI. WHETHER WHITE FEDERAL JUDGE RESPONDENT LIMBAUGH KNEW THAT THE GRAND JURY INDICTMENT 0922CR-01820-01 WAS VOID THREATEN PETITIONER AN INNONCENT BLACK MAN OF A WARNING THAT THE MATTER WAS CLOSED VIOLATED UNITED STATES LAWS 3 [ ]YES [ ]NO | . VIT. WHETHER WHITE FEDERAL JUDGE CATHERIN D. PERRY ENGAGED IN A CONSPIRACY WITH RESPONDENT LMBAUGH ON SEPTEMBER 09, 2016 WHEN SHE ACKOWLEDGE THAT PETITIOER ALLEGED THAT THE GRAND JURY INDICTMENT 0922-CR-01820-01 WAS INSUFFICIENT A VIOLATION OF HIBLER AND THAT THE VERDICT DIRECTOR USED IN THE CASE WAS WRONG A VIOLATION OF COOPER BOTH OF RESPONDENT LIMBAUGH DENIED HABEAS RELIEF AND DID NOT ALLOW PETITIONER TO PROCEED WITH HIS CIVIL RIGHT ACTION ON THE LEGAL ISSUE (HUTTON). . [1¥S []NO | VII. ' WHETHER WHITE FEDERAL JUDGE AUDREY G. FLEISSI ON APRIL 11, 2018 ENGAGED IN A CONSPIRACY UNDER COLOR OF MISSOURI LAW 565.073.2 AGREED WITH THE GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI TO COMMIT FRAUD ON THE COURT TO WILLFULLY SUBJECT PETITIONER BASED ON HIS COLOR AND RACE TO A DEPRIVATION OF HIS CONSTITUITONAL AND | Y STAUTORY RIGHTS TO AN ORDER OF WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS VACATING THE CONVICTION OF JUNE 27, 2013 AND SENTENCE OCTOBER 03, 2013 AS REQUIRED BY HALSER AND DENMON. [ ] YES [ ]NO IX. . WHETHER WHITE RESPONDENTS LIMBAUGH, AND DISTRICT JUDGES PERRY AND FLESSIG UNDER COLOR OF MISSOURI LAW KNEW THAT THE GOVBERNMENT OF THE STATE | OF MISSOURI USED VOID DOCUMENTS TO EXTRADITE PETITIONER FROM THE STATE OF MISSOURI IN EXCESS OF MISSOURI THREE YEARS STATUTE OF LIMITATION SUBSECTION 556.036.3(3) OF SECTION 556.036, RSMo (2000) CONSTITUTING KIDNAPPING UNDER MISSISSIPPI LAW SECTION 93-3-53 THAT | DOES NOT HAVE A STATUTE OF LIMITATION UNDER SECTION 91-5. . [ ] YES []NO WHETHER PETITIONER WAS DENIEND OF HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS NOT TO BE DEPRIVED OF HIS LIFE, 7 LIBERTY AND PROERTY WITHOUT DUE PROCES OF MISSOURI | SUPPREM COURT LAWS TIMEUS AND McQUEEN WHEN FALSELY ARRESTED ON FEBRUARY 22, 2012 BY UNITED STATES MARSHALS FOR DOMESTIC ASSAULT. -[ ] YES [ ]NO : XL WHETHER WHITE FEDERAL JUDG