Did homicide detectives violate court order to discharge from confinement?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED : : A. DID homicide detectives violate Circuit Court Judge Zilkowsky's order "immediate discharge from confinement in this case"? Plaintiff says Yes. # Response NO. 2. DID the second arrest moments after a favorable termination 11-18-96, illegal? Plaintiff says Yes. Respondent says NO. 3. DID homicide detectives acting under the color of law commit common law crimes OBSTRUCTION of JUSTICE and MALFEASANCE OF OFFICE? Plaintiff says Yes. Respondent says NO. ; 4. DID favorable termination during preliminary exam for due process violation result in favorable of the accused? oe Plaintiff says Yes. . Respondent NO. 5. DID Judge Hathaway, or Baltimore have authority or jurisdiction over this case? ; Plaintiff Says NO. Respondent says Yes. 6. DID Prosecutor O'Hair, stipulate courts jurisdiction, empower it to bear and determine and alleged cause of action that does not in fact exist? Plaintiff says Yes. Respondent says NO. : 7. DID Prosecutor O'Hair, acquire proper subject matter jurisdiction by simply empowering the court of | appeals although second and third arrest was illegal? . Plaintiff says NO. Respondent says Yes. 8. DID Circuit Court Judge Ryan, declare a huge jury empower Judge Hathaway, with jurisdiction? Plaintiff says NO. Respondent says Yes. 9. DID Circuit Court Judge Hathaway, and Dist. Court Magistrate Baltimore, Know the courts lack: subject : matter jurisdiction? . Plaintiff says Yes. ‘ Respondent says No. 10. DID Cir. Court Judge Zilkowsky, Hathaway, and Magistrate Waterstone, final ORDER, favorable for the : Plaintiff says Yes. Respondent says NO. 41. DOES due process violations and inadmissible evidence bar prosecution for the same charge? Plaintiff says Yes. : Respondent says NO. 12. DID municipalities such as homicide detectives violate constitutional rights, illegally arresting the accused, disobeying Dist. and Cir. Court ORDERS to release from confinement? Plaintiff says Yes. Respondent says NO. 43. HAVE Michigan Department of Justice DOJ, violate guaranteed constitutional rights of Due Process? . Plaintiff says Yes. Respondent says NO. , 14. DID the Fed. Dist. Judge Zatkoff, judgement on the merits, habeas corpus petition violate exhaustion of state prerequisite? . Petitioner says Yes. : Respondent says NO. 15. DID Judge Zatkoff, fail to consider the facts that prosecutor filed charges three times, prosecutors appeal and huge a jury? . Petitioner says Yes. _ Respondent says NO. 16. DID petitioner raise issues in federal court for relief from judgement arguing “Lack Of Jurisdiction and Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel"? Petitioner says Yes. Respondent says NO. 17, DID Judge Zatkoff, adjudicate the merits because it is more efficient not to analyze "exhaustion or procedural default? Petitioner says Yes. Respondent says NO. 18. DID U.S. App. Sixth Cir. Order Jan 2015, No. 14-1881. Claim that Peay, "could have discovered prosecutors appeals through exercise of due diligence"? Petitioner says Yes. Respondent says NO. 19. DID failure to exhaust state remedies create procedural default? : : Petitioner says Yes Respondent says NO. ’ 2 Petitioner says Yes. . Respondent says NO. 21. DID ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel violate constitutional rights? Petitioner says Yes ; Respondent says NO. : 22. DID three and one hung jury, require filing a motion for COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL, STARE DECISIS or RES JUDIACTA 3