Preparation for the convening of Police, March 6, 2013
Wednesday, March 6, 2013
Proposed testimony on the request for a preliminary investigation on the facts alleged by Ms. Guillaume about Sarkozy.
1) - requests to Mr. ProsecutorThe text of 12 November is the founding text of the request for an investigation jurdictionnelle.The request was made by two comprehensive texts dated 19 July 2012 and 27 July 2012.It was followed by a series of other whose only purpose is to develop specific aspects of this case.
This application is a reflection. It can not be fully apreciate without the study of texts that founded and texts that clearer.
This text is only an abstract of the arguments of this application.
2) - The factsIn a book in May 2012, Ms. Guillaume said that Mr Sarkozy has an MP obliged to give him a blowjob.He was under stress and with the usual vocabulary of sexual abusers.The alleged incidents took place at the Elysee Palace during a reception for the medal ceremony. The member has been abused between the decoration of the Prime Minister and Ms. Austrian Balkany.
3) - RapeRape is proved.Blowjob under duress, moral, material, physical, is legally rape. It is considered such by the French and American jurisprudence. As evidenced by numerous cases in 2011-2012.Strauss-Kahn in New York, Camaret France, school by boat, reports of rape of minors, etc..all these trials include oral sex under duress as rape. ,
Mr.
Sardozy used his authority, his power to demand satisfaction of the
member, the weakness of it (so declared by Mrs. William), to get a
blowjob.
I use the term "suck" or "bite" to place the story of facts in the mind of the abuser.A sexual abuser, there is no fellatio or woman. There is a slut who sucks a dick.Here, we take the public vocabulary, that of justice.
4) - The accuracy of the factual reportMrs. William reported facts. The Chained Duck the resumes. At the same time, Canal + had a debate on this issue with Mr. Balakany, UMP. Le Nouvel Observateur published an article.The Chained Duck has never been taken in the absence of background information false or only poorly received.Setting personal cause of Mr. Sarkozy is obvious. Personality of this level automatically tuned favorable judges if it makes a complaint. They do not accept the implication Free personalities of the state.
Neither Ms. Guillaume, nor Chained Duck or any other newspaper have been no libel on the part of the person concerned. The latter having used the French to let pass any judicially notice about it.Mr Sarkozy has no public protest High to overturn what Ms Guillaume. He has made no denial or complaint.Mr Balkany, MP does not really reversed the facts. He just said it was a "treat" and meant he had to stay there. What the journalists obeyed.Here, Mrs. William M. Sarkozy staged a crime.We therefore believe that the report of the allegations may be required to factually accurate.
5) - The characterization of the factsA-GradeThe qualities of rapeThe honorable member comes to funding. She will get the result of this "treat" in the words of Mr. Balkany.It follows:a-Rapeb-Prostitution. The grant comes in payment of a sexual act which is then a password.b-Pimping. Sarkozy is the organizer of this implementation prostitution of a woman and the beneficiary of the transaction.Procuring c-hotelier. Mr. Sarkozy provides local permits this action.d-Conspiracy, if the honorable member was placed there intentionally.e-Diversion of public fundsf-Subtract taxes.Politically-BMr. Sarkozy rape a woman who is a Member.The rape took place while Mr. Sarkozy is running. It is therefore under the Head of State, Head of the Executive Power.Member of the same part in the reception to get a grant. It is necessary for his city and for his election. It is in the exercise of its functions.It is therefore against Mr. Sarkozy, the representative of the legislative branch.
From
the moment Mr. Sarkozy isolates that member to exercise it on a
particular violence in the context of its duties and functions of the
member, the two protagonists are characterized each by their respective
functions consititutionnelles.
Mr Sarkozy realizes thus:a-rape of a womanb-Rape of a Memberc-rape of the Consitution
Administratively C-Mr Sarkozy did not act randomly. He acted intentionally to lower the parliament and publicly express the préhéminence the Executive.He has organized a parallel right to public law. Double legality.We find the use of this dual legality or lawfulness Mafia inserted into the legality public in various administrative practices.Sarkozy
has somehow given the backing of universal suffrage in practices that
are no longer made but may then require to become public law.Mr Sarkozy is engaged in operation of government organization.6) - AmnestyThe first argument refuge behind which advocates public Sarkozy is presidential immunity.This argument does not hold here.1 - Immunity very popular in the 90s was beaten by brêche worldwide.Almost all states become democratic guarantees on return they granted immunity to dictators that they leave power2
- The French justice does not recognize the immunity of African Heads
of State for simple cases of common law called the "ill-gotten gains."How can she hide behind immunity chance not to consider the facts of the same nature for Mr. Sarkozy.These facts are of the same nature as they are common law crimes heinous that institutional consequences.3 - At the time of his arrest, Mr. Strauss-Kahn also enjoyed immunity as Head of State, under secretary of the IMF.4
- renouncing of his own, this immunity, Strauss-Kahn showed that Mr.
Sarkozy may well explain voluntarily before the court if it considers
that this is baseless and slanderous.5 - Recognize immunity for rape, it is creating the droit de seigneur.This is a feudal law. As such, it is unconstitutional since August 4, 1789.
7) - The legal situation personalitiesa-Salas,
judge researcher, developed in Paris in October 2007, the contention
that the action of important personalities can not be considered by the
court in response to requests made inquiries of those conditions Social modest. Indeed,
ordinary employees can not understand the facts of which they speak and
subjecting them to the magistrates they carry a considerable twists
personalities involved. When they are paid, the evil would be done.
b-The facts refute such reasoning. Almost
all politicians convicted, including those who have been in prison,
could find a chair elected every time they are shown. There is no connection for the public between a conviction for common law and an inability to stand.
c-By
asking that Mr. Sarkozy meets Justice criminal acts attributed to him,
Mr. Salomone does not undertake public career of Mr. Sarkozy if these
acts are wrong. They are true, it will indeed tell what title he claimed again become the guarantor of the proper functioning of the state. This debate will be the least of it.
8) - The procedurea-If necessary I'll speak to the Constitutional Council and the European Court of Human Rights and the Council of Europe.
b-If the judges want to be a lawyer, just as Mr. prosecutor instructs the BAJ give me the total AJ.
Marc Salomone
jeudi, mars 07, 2013
Préparation de la convocation de police du 5 mars 2013
Préparation de la convocation de police du 5 mars 2013
Mercredi 6 mars 2013
Projet de déposition sur
la demande d'ouverture d'une enquête préliminaire concernant les
faits allégués par Mme Guillaume au sujet de M. Sarkozy.
1)- Les demandes faites à
M. le procureur de la République
Le texte du 12 novembre
n'est pas le texte fondateur de cette demande d'ouverture d'enquête
jurdictionnelle.
La demande a été
établie par deux textes très complets datés du 19 juillet 2012 et
du 27 juillet 2012.
Il s'en est suivi une
série d'autres qui ont pour seul vocation de développer certains
aspects particuliers de cette affaire.
Cette demande est une
reflexion. Elle ne peut s'aprécier pleinement sans l'étude des
textes qui la fondent et des textes qui la précisent.
Le présent texte n'est
qu'un abrégé indicatif des arguments de cette demande.
2)- Les faits
Dans un livre de mai
2012, Mme Guillaume déclare que M. Sarkozy a mis une députée dans
l'obligation de lui faire une fellation.
Il l'a fait dans des
conditions de contrainte et avec le vocabulaire habituel des abuseurs
sexuels.
Le faits allégués se
sont déroulés à l'Elysée durant une réception pour la remise de
médailles. La députée a été abusée entre la décoration de M.
le Premier ministre autrichien et celle de Mme Balkany.
3)- Le viol
Le viol est avéré.
La fellation sous
contrainte, morale, matérielle, physique, est légalement un viol.
Elle est jugée telle par la jurisprudence française et américaine.
Comme en témoignent de multiples affaires de 2011-2012.
Strauss-kahn à NY,
Camaret en France, l'école en bâteau, des reportages sur le viol
des mineurs, etc.
tous ces procès incluent
la fellation sous contrainte comme étant un viol. ,
M. Sardozy a usé de son
autorité, de son pouvoir de satisfaction de la demande de la
députée, de la faiblesse de celle-ci (déclarée telle par Mme
Guillaume), pour obtenir une fellation.
J'emploie les termes
« sucer » ou « bite » pour placer le récit
des faits dans la mentalité de l'abuseur.
Pour un abuseur sexuel,
il n'y a ni fellation ni femme. Il y a une salope qui suce une bite.
Ici, nous reprenons le
vocabulaire public, celui de la justice.
4)- L'exactitude du
rapport des faits
Mme Guillaume rapporte
les faits. Le Canard Enchaîné les reprend. En même temps, Canal +
fait un débat sur cette question en compagnie de M. Balakany, député
UMP. Le Nouvel observateur publie un article.
Le Canard Enchaîné n'a
jamais été pris en faute d'informations de fond fausses ou
seulement mal reçues.
La mise en cause
personnelle de M. Sarkozy est flagrante. Une personnalité de ce
niveau a automatiquement l'écoute favorable des magistrats si elle
porte plainte. Ceux-ci n'acceptant pas la mise en cause gratuite des
personnalités de l'Etat.
Ni Mme Guillaume, ni le
Canard Enchaîné, ni aucun autre journal n'ont fait l'objet d'aucun
procès en diffamation de la part de la personne concernée. Celle-ci
ayant habitué les français à ne laisser passer judiciairement
aucune remarque à son sujet.
M. Sarkozy n'a élévé
aucune protestation publique pour infirmer les propos de Mme
Guillaume. Il n'a apporté aucun démenti, ni porté plainte.
M. Balkany, député, n'a
pas vraiment infirmé les faits. Il a simplement dit qu'il s'agissait
d'une « gâterie » et signifié qu'il fallait en rester
là. Ce à quoi les journalistes présents ont obéi.
Ici, Mme Guillaume met en
scène M. Sarkozy dans un crime.
Nous pensons donc que le
rapport des faits allégués peut être tenu factuellement pour
exact.
5)- La qualification des
faits
A- Techniquement
Les qualités du viol
Mme la députée vient
pour une subvention. Elle l'obtiendra à la suite de cette
« gâterie », pour reprendre le mot de M. Balkany.
Il s'en suit :
a- Viol
b- Prostitution. La
subvention vient en paiment d'un acte sexuel qui est alors une passe.
b- Proxénétisme. M.
Sarkozy est l'organisateur de cette mise en prostitution d'une femme
et le bénéficiaire de l'opération.
c- Proxénétisme
hôtelier. M. Sarkozy fournit le local qui permet cette action.
d- Association de
malfaiteurs, si Mme la députée a été placée à cet endroit
intentionnellement.
e- Détournement de fonds
publics
f- Soustraction aux
impôts.
B- Politiquement
M. Sarkozy viol une femme
qui est députée.
Ce viol a lieu alors que
M. Sarkozy est en fonction. Il agit donc au titre de Chef de l'Etat,
Chef du Pouvoir exécutif.
Mme la Députée
participe à cette réception pour obtenir une subvention. Celle-ci
est nécessaire pour sa ville et pour son élection. Elle est dans
l'exercice de ses fonctions.
Elle est donc, face à M.
Sarkozy, la représentante du Pouvoir législatif.
A partir du moment où M.
Sarkozy isole cette députée pour exercer sur elle une violence
particulière, dans le cadre des ses fonctions et des fonctions de la
députée, les deux protagonistes se caractérisent chacun par leurs
fonctions consititutionnelles respectives.
M. Sarkozy réalise
donc :
a- Le viol d'une femme
b- Le viol d'une députée
c- le viol de la
consitution
C- Administrativement
M. Sarkozy n'a pas agit
au hasard. Il a agit intentionnellement pour abaisser le parlement et
manifester publiquement la préhéminence du Pouvoir exécutif.
Il a ainsi organisé un
droit parallèle au droit public. Une double légalité.
Nous retrouvons l'usage
de cette double légalité, ou d'une légalité maffieuse insérée
dans la légalité publique, dans diverses pratiques administratives.
M. Sarkozy a en quelque
sorte donné la caution du suffrage universel à des pratiques qui ne
sont plus alors de fait mais peuvent exiger de devenir le droit
public.
M. Sarkozy se livre à
une opération d'organisation des pouvoirs publics.
6)- L'amnistie
Le premier argument
derrière lequel se réfugient les partisans publics de M. Sarkozy
est l'immunité présidentielle.
Cette argument ne tient
pas ici.
1- L'immunité très en
vogue dans les années 90 est battue en brêche partout dans le
monde.
Presque tous les Etats
qui deviennent démocratiques reviennent sur les garanties
immunitaires qu'ils ont accordé aux dictateurs pour que ceux-ci
quittent le pouvoir
2- La justice français
ne reconnaît pas l'immunité des Chefs d'Etat africains pour les
simples affaires de droit commun dites des « Biens mal
acquis ».
Comment peut elle se
réfugier derrière une immunité de hasard pour ne pas examiner des
faits de même natures concernant M. Sarkozy.
Ces faits sont de même
nature puisque ce sont des faits de droit commun crapuleux qui ont
des conséquences institutionnelles.
3- Au moment de son
arrestation, M. Strauss-kahn bénéficiait lui aussi d'une immunité
de Chef d'Etat, au titre de secrétaire général du FMI.
4- En renonçant, de son
propre chef, à cette immunité, M. Strauss-kahn a démontré que M.
Sarkozy peut très bien s'expliquer volontairement devant la justice
s'il estime que tout cela est sans fondement et calomnieux.
5- Reconnaître
l'immunité pour le viol, c'est instaurer le droit de cuissage.
Celui-ci est un droit
féodal. A ce titre, il est inconstitutionnel depuis le 4 aout 1789.
7)- La situation
judiciaire des personalités
a- M. Salas,
juge-chercheur, a développé dans le parisien, en octobre 2007, la
thèse selon laquelle L'action des personalités importantes ne peut
pas être examinée par la justice suite à des demandes d'enquêtes
faites des personnes de conditions sociales modestes. En effet, les
simples employés ne peuvent pas comprendre les faits dont elles
parlent et en les soumettant aux magistrats elles portent un tord
considérables aux personnalités visées. Lorsque ces dernières
sont acquittées, le mal serait fait.
b- Or, les faits
infirment un tel raisonnement. Presque tous les élus condamnés, y
compris ceux qui ont fait de la prison, ont pu retrouver un fauteuil
d'élu chaque fois qu'ils se sont représentés. Il n'y a aucun lien,
pour le public, entre une condamnation pour droit commun et une
incapacité d'éligibilité.
c- En demandant que M.
Sarkozy réponde à la justice des actions criminelles qu'on lui
prête, M. Salomone n'engage donc pas la carrière publique de M.
Sarkozy si ces actes sont faux. S'ils sont vrais, il devra en effet
dire à quel titre il prétend devenir à nouveau le garant du bon
fonctionnement de l'Etat. Ce débat sera la moindre des choses.
8)- La procédure
a- S'il le faut je
m'adresserai au Conseil constitutionnel ainsi qu'à la Cour
européenne des droits de l'homme et au Conseil de l'Europe.
b- Si les magistrats
veulent avoir à faire à un avocat, il suffit que M. le procureur de
la République donne l'ordre au BAJ de m'accorder l'AJ totale.
Marc SALOMONE
samedi, mars 02, 2013
Calling police comment, prosecutor, maneuvers.
The reference text is the French text.D.50 @ gmx.frCalling police comment, prosecutor, maneuvers.Paris, Friday, March 1, 2013
President of the Republic
The care ofMr. BESNARDChief of Staff
Your ref. : PDR/SCP/CDO/AES/A005882
Subject:a-Letter to Mr. Prosecutor of November 12, 2012b-Calling the police 06,03,13
Copy to Ms. Garde des Sceaux.
Mr. President,I just received, police from 20 ° ardt., UPQ Charonne a "Notice at the request of the Guardian of Peace Michineau. 'Wednesday, March 6, 2013, at 12, I will be heard on the letter of 12 November 2012 addressed to Mr. Prosecutor.Concerning the allegations about Mr Sarkozy, this letter is to connect the request to open a criminal investigation into the case, in fact or in law, which I am aware.As stated on the letter of 12 November, the two letters basing that request date of 19 July 2012 and 27 July 2012.
I do not understand why Mr. Attorney Régublique wants me to agree on a schedule that text only comment on the work product demand and does not expose it really. It would be so easy to record my letters of July then the judges can rule supreme.It reminds me why I do not trust these people and the merits of my insistence.I have always respected the procedures and legal decisions, but if I let it work for judges only, on the basis of trust, we would not have a decision right but a cope of lead.I feel what inconvenience judges is primarily the idea that ordinary French can say that they have been beneficial to go to court.I experience this hatred and contempt that the shock is reflected sometimes in my mail.a-I was tortured to make me withdraw my complaint for rape and gang attacks organized against the mentally disabled and vulnerable people. I never met a judge to discuss the facts. Entire hierarchy has been attached, into the forfeiture, to organize the obstruction.b-two years ago, I was summoned to the police station for even my complaint for forgery against a public President and General Counsel of the Court of Cassation. I have been received for saying I'm a shit and my action is "unimportant."c-I saw the prosecutor, the police, bailiff unite against the mentally ill to prevent them from touching the damages awarded by the court.d-For justice by ending these conflicts procedures, I made proposals for these individuals as others can be compensated without it costs nothing to the state and even in it for them. No response.I tried everything, all suffered, nothing did. What matters to magistrates is to show us that we are nothing.I think this meeting is a ruse of the same order. If the summons had been honest, Mr. Prosecutor would have heard about e founders of July.If I saw that I lived on the torture sessions and fake, I send the case to the European Court of Human Rights and the Council of Europe as any European citizen Biolorussie .Please accept, Mr. President, the assurances of my highest consideration,
Marc Salomone
President of the Republic
The care ofMr. BESNARDChief of Staff
Your ref. : PDR/SCP/CDO/AES/A005882
Subject:a-Letter to Mr. Prosecutor of November 12, 2012b-Calling the police 06,03,13
Copy to Ms. Garde des Sceaux.
Mr. President,I just received, police from 20 ° ardt., UPQ Charonne a "Notice at the request of the Guardian of Peace Michineau. 'Wednesday, March 6, 2013, at 12, I will be heard on the letter of 12 November 2012 addressed to Mr. Prosecutor.Concerning the allegations about Mr Sarkozy, this letter is to connect the request to open a criminal investigation into the case, in fact or in law, which I am aware.As stated on the letter of 12 November, the two letters basing that request date of 19 July 2012 and 27 July 2012.
I do not understand why Mr. Attorney Régublique wants me to agree on a schedule that text only comment on the work product demand and does not expose it really. It would be so easy to record my letters of July then the judges can rule supreme.It reminds me why I do not trust these people and the merits of my insistence.I have always respected the procedures and legal decisions, but if I let it work for judges only, on the basis of trust, we would not have a decision right but a cope of lead.I feel what inconvenience judges is primarily the idea that ordinary French can say that they have been beneficial to go to court.I experience this hatred and contempt that the shock is reflected sometimes in my mail.a-I was tortured to make me withdraw my complaint for rape and gang attacks organized against the mentally disabled and vulnerable people. I never met a judge to discuss the facts. Entire hierarchy has been attached, into the forfeiture, to organize the obstruction.b-two years ago, I was summoned to the police station for even my complaint for forgery against a public President and General Counsel of the Court of Cassation. I have been received for saying I'm a shit and my action is "unimportant."c-I saw the prosecutor, the police, bailiff unite against the mentally ill to prevent them from touching the damages awarded by the court.d-For justice by ending these conflicts procedures, I made proposals for these individuals as others can be compensated without it costs nothing to the state and even in it for them. No response.I tried everything, all suffered, nothing did. What matters to magistrates is to show us that we are nothing.I think this meeting is a ruse of the same order. If the summons had been honest, Mr. Prosecutor would have heard about e founders of July.If I saw that I lived on the torture sessions and fake, I send the case to the European Court of Human Rights and the Council of Europe as any European citizen Biolorussie .Please accept, Mr. President, the assurances of my highest consideration,
Marc Salomone
Convocation de police, commentaire, procureur de la République, manoeuvres
Convocation de police, commentaire, procureur de la République, manoeuvres
Paris, le
vendredi 1er mars 2013
Monsieur le
Président de la République
Aux bons soins de
Monsieur BESNARD
Chef du Cabinet
Vos réf. :
PDR/SCP/CDO/AES/A005882
Objet :
a- Lettre à
M. le procureur de la République du 12 novembre 2012
b-
Convocation à la police du 06,03,13
Copie à Mme
la Garde des Sceaux.
Monsieur le
Président,
Je viens de
recevoir, de la police du 20° ardt., UPQ Charonne, une « Convocation
à la demande du Gardien de la Paix Michineau. »
Le mercredi
6 mars 2013, à 12h, je serai entendu sur la lettre du 12 novembre
2012 adressée à M. le procureur de la République.
Concernant
les faits allégués au sujet de M. Sarkozy, cette lettre vise à
relier la demande d'ouverture d'une enquête judiciaire à la
jurisprudence, de fait ou de droit, dont j'ai connaissance.
Comme il est
indiqué sur cette lettre du 12 novembre, les deux lettres fondant
cette demande datent du 19 juillet 2012 et du 27 juillet 2012.
Je ne
comprend pas pourquoi M. le procureur de la République veut me faire
entendre sur un texte annexe qui ne fait que commenter le travail qui
produit la demande et ne l'expose pas vraiment. Ce serait si simple
de faire acter mes courriers de juillet pour qu'ensuite les
magistrats puissent statuer souverainement.
Cela me
rappelle pourquoi je n'ai pas confiance en ces gens et le bienfondé
de mon insistance.
J'ai
toujours respecté les procédures et les décisions légales, mais,
si je laissais ce travail aux magistrats seuls, au motif de la
confiance, nous n'aurions pas une décision de droit mais une chape
de plomb.
J'ai le
sentiment que ce qui gêne les magistrats c'est d'abord l'idée que
les français ordinaires puissent dire qu'il leur a été bénéfique
de s'adresser à la justice.
J'ai
l'expérience de cette haine et de ce mépris dont le choc ressenti
transparaît parfois dans mes courriers.
a- J'ai été
torturé pour me faire retirer mes plaintes pour viol et agressions
en bande organisée contre des handicapés mentaux et personnes
vulnérables. Je n'ai jamais pu rencontrer un magistrat pour discuter
des faits. Toute la hiérarchie a été solidaire, jusque dans la
forfaiture, pour organiser l'obstruction.
b- Il y a
deux ans, j'ai été convoqué au même commissariat pour ma plainte
pour faux en écritures publiques contre une Présidente et un Avocat
général de la Cour de Cassation. Je n'ai été reçu que pour me
signifier que je suis une merde et que mon action est « sans
importance ».
c- J'ai vu
le parquet, la police, l'huissier, se liguer contre des malades
mentaux pour leur interdire de toucher les dommages et intérêts
décidés par le tribunal.
d- Pour
obtenir la justice en faisant cesser ces conflits de procédures,
j'ai fait des propositions pour que ces justiciables comme les autres
puissent être indemnisés sans que ça ne coûte rien à l’État et
même que ça lui rapporte. Aucune réponse.
J'ai tout
essayé, tout subi, rien n'y a fait. Ce qui importe aux magistrats,
c'est de nous montrer que nous ne sommes rien.
Je pense que
cette convocation est une ruse de même ordre. Si la convocation
avait été honnête, M. le procureur de la République m'aurait fait
entendre sur les courriers fondateurs de juillet.
Si je revis
ce que j'ai vécu concernant les séances de tortures et de faux,
j'envoie le dossier à la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme et
au Conseil de l'Europe ; comme n'importe quel citoyen européen
de Biolorussie.
Je vous prie
d'agréer, Monsieur le Président de la République, l'assurance de
mes salutations distinguées,
Marc SALOMONE
call the police
MINISTRY OF THE INTERIOR OF POLICE PREFECTURE
Paris, 01.03.13
DIRECTION URBAN LOCAL POLICE
BRANCH POLICE TERRITORIAL the
4th SECTOR
R.D.E.P. CHARIONNE
48 rue Saint Blaise
75020 PARIS
tel.: 01.53.27.38.40:
Fax: 01.53.27.38.50
NOTICE
At the request of the Guardian of Peace Michineau
Mrs. M.: Marc Salomone
Is kindly requested to report to the following address:
UPQ Charonne
48 rue Saint Blaise
75020 PARIS
(Nearest Metro: Bus Maraichers line 9 or line 26: stop Orteaux)
12H on 03/06/13.
for:
In the event that the date and time set does not suit you, you can get the change of appointment by calling: 01.53.27.38.40.
î
In case you are concerned, you can usefully bring with you the following documents designated:
1 - Identity
0 Driving License
0 Carte Grise
Fine 0Timbre deEuros
0 Other '..
Seal and signature
Paris, 01.03.13
DIRECTION URBAN LOCAL POLICE
BRANCH POLICE TERRITORIAL the
4th SECTOR
R.D.E.P. CHARIONNE
48 rue Saint Blaise
75020 PARIS
tel.: 01.53.27.38.40:
Fax: 01.53.27.38.50
NOTICE
At the request of the Guardian of Peace Michineau
Mrs. M.: Marc Salomone
Is kindly requested to report to the following address:
UPQ Charonne
48 rue Saint Blaise
75020 PARIS
(Nearest Metro: Bus Maraichers line 9 or line 26: stop Orteaux)
12H on 03/06/13.
for:
In the event that the date and time set does not suit you, you can get the change of appointment by calling: 01.53.27.38.40.
î
In case you are concerned, you can usefully bring with you the following documents designated:
1 - Identity
0 Driving License
0 Carte Grise
Fine 0Timbre deEuros
0 Other '..
Seal and signature
convocation à la police
MINISTERE DE L'INTERIEUR PREFECTURE DE
POLICE
Paris, le 01.03.13
DIRECTION de la POLICE URBAINE DE
PROXIMITE
SOUS-DIRECTION de la POLICE
TERRITORIALE
4ème SECTEUR
R.D.E.P. CHARONNE
48 rue Saint Blaise
75020 PARIS
tel.: 01.53.27.38.40 :
Fax :01.53.27.38.50
CONVOCATION
A la demande du Gardien de la Paix
MICHINEAU
M. Mme : Salomone Marc
Est prié de bien vouloir se présenter
à l'adresse suivante:
UPQ Charonne,
48 rue Saint Blaise
75020 PARIS
(Métro plus proche: Maraichers ligne 9
ou Bus Ligne 26 : arrêt Orteaux
Le 06.03.13 à 12H.
Pour :
Dans l'hypothèse où la date et
l'heure fixées ne vous conviendraient pas, vous pouvez obtenir la
modification du rendez-vous en téléphonant au : 01.53.27.38.40.
î
Dans le cas d'espèce qui vous
concerne, vous pouvez utilement vous munir des pièces ci-après
désignées:
1- Pièce d'identité
0 Permis de Conduire
0 Carte Grise
0Timbre Amende de x Euros
0 Autres '..
Sceau et signature
Sarkozy and Strauss-Kahn, the mirror a couple justice: justice sponsorship / sacrificial justice.
Reference text in French.D.50 @ gmx.fr
Sarkozy and Strauss-Kahn, the mirror a couple justice: justice sponsorship / sacrificial justice.
.Paris, Wednesday, February 27, 2013
Copy to:President of the RepublicMadam AttorneyYour Ref. 12/00 282 (quoted in all correspondence)N. No. : -1 - Wednesday, July 4, 2012. Article Chained Duck.2 - Thursday, July 19, 2012, article in the Nouvel Observateur.3 - Thursday, July 19, 2012. Letter to Mr. Prosecutor.4 - Thursday, July 19, 2012. Letter to the President of the Republic.5 - Friday, July 27, 2012, Addendum.6 - Friday, July 27. Letter to the President of the Republic7 - Monday, November 12, 2012. Letter to Mr. Prosecutor8 - Monday, November 12, 2012. Letter to the President of the Republic9 - Thursday, November 29, 2012. Letter to Mr. ProsecutorCopies to the President of the Republic and the Minister of Justice Ms.10 - Monday, December 3, 2012. Letter to Mr. ProsecutorCopies to the President of the Republic and the Minister of Justice Ms.11 - Friday, January 11, 2013. Letter to Mr. ProsecutorCopies to the President of the Republic and the Minister of Justice Ms.12 - Thursday, February 21, 2013. Letter to Mr. ProsecutorCopies to the President of the Republic and the Minister of Justice Ms.
Re: Sarkozy and Strauss-Kahn, the mirror duality judicial justice and justice sacrificial sponsorshipMr. Prosecutor,Title 1: The mirror effect1) - The emergence of evidenceGradually, the judicial treatment, Franco-American, personal acts of Mr. Strauss-Kahn modifies the independent judgment of judges in the judicial treatment of personal acts of Mr. Sarkozy.It is increasingly difficult to conceive as impartial, calm, ordinary judges that protect one another and sacrifice.In fact, the two cases appear homogeneous. They form, conditioning, one by the other. Treating one reflects the other.2) - The homogeneity of filesMr. Strauss-Kahn and Sarkozy have used the same practice, fellatio, with the same type of person, a woman in a position dominated the same behavior, the absolute necessity of the act. They made at the time of the same status as head of state for one and equivalent head of state to another. This equivalence is marked by the same judicial immunity. One is Head of State when he commits the act. The other aspires to the same place when committing similar acts.
The judicial system will accommodate the facts are brought to the attention of judges creates an antagonistic duality. One is destroyed by justice. All sexual activities become criminal. The other is under legal protection which saves any mention of judicial actions. In addition, this protection extends to the whole field of public communication and spares him any public mention of the fact.3) - The mirror effect1 - Immunity rechargable.Protectors Mr Sarkozy may mention two arguements to justify the protection they surround.a-The function of Head of State at the time of the facts, but the immunity argument no longer holds. We saw in our previous papers.Moreover, in this case, it would also apply to Mr. Strauss-Kahn for offenses of pimping. It was at the time of the facts in immunity as head of state General Secretary of the IMF.b-His possible candidacy in 2017. It is so important that he could not be bothered with a history of buttock.2 - The identity conflictThis cascade of apology in conflict with the treatment that Mr. Strauss-Kahn. For him the contrary, each of its functions, or its potential future functions, is an opportunity for qualifying criminal acts of privacy. IMF chief, he still falls for the Sofitel. He may want to reappear, it then falls to the Carlton. He lectures, spontaneous demonstrations are organized.Feminists howl at each of his appearances. The same feminists are silent on the same facts concerning Mr. Sarkozy.In one case, the high office, present and future, protect. In the other, they are a moral reason for criminalization.3 - Politics and parainageBy mirror effect, it is increasingly clear that this protection is similar to a parainage.It is clear that decisions to sacrifice one and protect the other were taken. They are applied. These decisions and this application conflict with the proper exercise of the judicial authority.Title 2: The parallelismHow is this parallelism antagonistic?We will examine two sets of facts that motivated prosecutions against Mr. Strauss-Kahn and he seems well established that they are also due to Mr Sarkozy.a-Fellatiob-pimping.4) - Alternative factsa-Strauss-Kahn went to court for a blowjob imposed.b-The French court questioned fellatio imposed by Mr Sarkozy to a Member.5) - ImmunityAt the time of these events, Mr. Strauss-Kahn is Secretary General of the IMF, it is the same rank as the Heads of State. It enjoys the same immunity.Strauss-Kahn waives its immunity for trial in the criminal trial and prove his innocence. In civil cases, this abandonment of immunity is considered proved.Independently discussions on the value of the immunity it dons Sarkozy, the former Mr. Strauss-Kahn tells us that nothing prevents Mr. Sarkozy to decide himself to answer the questions of justice, s it feels innocent.6) - Justice and elective careerContrary to what we want to believe, court appearances do not affect the career politicians. Most prisoners are re-elected when their civil prohibitions are closed. The facts are there.Therefore:a-Si Mr Sarkozy met its own issues of justice and got a discharge thereof, its image would be improved.b-If Mr. Sarkozy was deemed at fault, it does not necessarily hurt his career elective.This is in response to insults of Judge Salas-researcher.Impediments suffered by Mr. Strauss-kahn on his return to public life seem to be related to forces leaders who want to eliminate. Demonstrated unmanned events during his performance at the Oxford students. Coincidentally, this type of event does not exist on Mr Sarkozy.In any case, its elimination does not match the general case of elected officials convicted in France. Sarkozy, meanwhile, has solidarity with the silence of all network settings, including those who call themselves opponents.It is false to say, as a supported Judge Salas-researcher in the case of Neuilly apartment of Mr Sarkozy, the request to open a criminal investigation into the allegations against Mr Sarkozy can be likened to an aggression against a helpless person, a cabal of marginal against a public figure disarmed.Mr. Salas only take over the ideology of "martyr." According to this ideology, certain categories of people, variously defined, are intended to set causes constant unfounded. These warnings can cause prolonged by criminal actions.
This grotesque farce ideological allows'' eliminate public debate in all its forms, gradually forming the questioners by fools and criminals questioned by people and people above the law and common understanding.Here we find the approach of the people that we are involved in their crime. This particular goal delinquent also claim a special place, feudal in law enforcement.
7) - Prostitution and Pimping1 - The equivalence of qualificationsMr. Stauss-a-kahn is indicted for pimping. He participated in the gathering of prostitutes in one place for to use in meetings.b-At the time of these events, Mr. Strauss-Kahn is Secretary General of the IMF, it is the same rank as the heads of state, it enjoys the same immunity.c-Mr Sarkozy delivered a formal prostitution of a woman who has not made elected MP for grants by blowjobs.2 - Sarkozy and prostitutiona-Prostitution has been since the subsidy payment became a sexual act became a happening.b-Pimping is characterized for the fact of the creation of prostitution, the protection afforded to the fact, the benefit of institutional policy that draws Sarkozy. Setting prostitution of a Member that does not ejaculate.c-The hotel pimping is proved by the invitation to the lady in prostitution during follow Mr. Sarkozy put in a room with this provision.The d-band organized pimping is possible. There is credible evidence that this lady was not placed there for public reception by chance.This requirement of e-fellatio is above all a political act.f-The abuse of weakness is obvious. It is known that Mr. Sarkozy member to need this grant. It is itself vulnerable, which is why it was probably chosen. Mrs. William says itself a strong woman does not accept this kind of market. The honorable member pays his weakness. It would be improper.On this point: "Prostitution particularly vulnerable, the law punishes three years in prison and 45,000 euros fine soliciting, accepting or obtaining, in exchange for remuneration or a promise to pay, sex from a person who engages in prostitution, including occasionally, when this person has a particular vulnerability, apparent or known to the perpetrator. For example: a person with an illness, infirmity, physical or mental disability or who is pregnant. Article 225-12-1 second paragraph of the Penal Code. "3 - ComparisonA-Strauss-Kahn was indicted for pimping agravé and organized gang.I do not party here on qualifications. They are legal.Judges accuse Strauss-Kahn:a-To have with women is notoriously prostitutes.b-Having established a network of people on the pretext of friendly services formed a team of professionals rabatage for evenings priced in favor of Mr. Strauss-Kahn.I do not betray their argument.B-Notwithstanding the upcoming trial, Strauss-Kahn was indicted for violation of a purely formal principle prohibited. It directly affects person.He has sex sessions with people who need to be paid. They are professionals. Adults are willing to pay and to provide sexual.C-Sarkozy's use of its power to compel them:-A woman was in a weak position to give him a blowjob. It is not free.Which leads, rape, prostitution, pimping, pandering hotel, abuse of weakness and probable gang.b-A MP to submit to his desire.Causing the aggression against the Executive Branch Legislative Branch, the rape of the constitution.D-The person is not sucking prostitutuée or consent. She is a Member. She is forced.8) - cross AffairsA-The forced blowjobs1 - Strauss-kahn gets sucked under the Sofitel hotel guest also rank Head of State. The woman said she was forced.2 - Mr. Sarkozy is sucking force at the Elysee Palace as President.3 - Mr. Strauss-Kahn is considered by U.S. courts. It recognizes that it does not place and led to pay a large sum to compensate its prosecution.4 - Mr. Sarkozy has an unwavering solidarity of the judiciary and politics. It does not stop there. It benefits from the solidarity of feminists and women executives who are related to this case.5 - Mrs. William reported this case.a-From all participants, it is the only one to do so. While this is a public affair.b-It takes the most hackneyed refrain from the subjugation of women. She says it is the fault of the woman, since she is left to do, and who wants to can.c-Two centuries of feminist struggles to get there.d-It takes up the theme of the service obligation. It does not say that everything is set by law, but to conceal the fact that the rape of a member is a constitutional issue and therefore legal and not a matter of changing habits.B-prostitution and proxénétismes1 - Strauss-Kahn sex with hookers to be aware and demanding. No material no direct evidence that he knew the work of its partners. The firm conviction of judges is respectable, but it remains a conviction.2 - Mr. Sarkozy as an MP in prostitutée. He made public in the exercise of its functions, witnessed. It seems that there is no doubt as to the accuracy of the report of the facts. He took advantage of the weakness of the member itself known. He moved to pimp, pimp hotel. It is plausible that this session has mobilized an organized gang.4 - Mr. Strauss-Kahn is accountable to justice.He was summoned to courtb He is indictedc-All judicial chain is mobilized.5 - Mr. Sarkozy has no account, of any kind, to make justice.9) - The legal effect backFor two sets of identical criminal offenses attributable to men of the same social and professional conditions, justice orientations gives two actions perfectly dissimilar and contradictory.These guidelines are not due to different assessments of similar facts. Indeed, for a justice occurs. For the other it refuses to rule on requests for review before it.Publicity of a lawsuit for one. For another, the silence of the judges, their refusal to declare informed.However, for this procedure to Mr. Strauss-Kahn, judges can no longer say:a-stories buttocks leaders do not concern them,b-executives can not be appointed criminals, rapists and a fortiori.c-prostitution and pimping only concern thugs Eastern Dodo or Brine.d-persons of rank of Head of State are not criminal in their concerns.They shall not remain silent for Sarkozy. They have no legitimacy to the judicial or law, or jurisprudence.More the case Strauss-Kahn will change and it will show that the gap between it and requests for investigation into Mr Sarkozy is not the court but the protection of a suspected criminal.Judges do not make two different judgments, nor open two different procedures. For the same category of offense under homogeneous conditions, they seem to pick on a man and protect another.10) - The Constitution1 - breach of the principle of equalityThis difference in treatment is a breach of equality before the law. In this case art. 6 of the Declaration is violated.- "(The law) must be the same for all, whether it protects or punishes. 'Article VILaw is the expression of the general will. All citizens have the right to participate personally, or through their representatives, in its formation. It must be the same for all, whether it protects or punishes. All citizens, being equal in its eyes, are equally admissible to all public dignities, places, and employments, according to their capacity and without other distinction than that of their virtues and talents.2 - The comment:Article by Professor Jacques ROBERT "The principle of equality in the French constitutional law" (The specifications of the Constitutional Council No. 3, 1997)"Article 6 of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789 (which, from the famous decision of 16 July 1971, is part of the" constitutionality block "which confronts the French Constitutional Council laws that has to be examined).But this Article 6 states that "the law must be the same for all" principle that the Council nevertheless admitting modulations relaxed when they are based on objective criteria and ration sionals in light of the objective pursued by the legislator and that this is itself neither unconstitutional nor vitiated by a manifest error of assessment; "3 - modulations:A-The Constitutional Council has admitted modulations.a-When they are based on objective and rational in light of the objective pursued by the legislator;b-What is the objective itself:- Neither unconstitutional,- Neither vitiated by a manifest error of assessment;
B-In this case the "modulations" proposed by the judges in the practice of inequality before the law of the two aforementioned executives are not based on "objective criteria"11) - The internal conflict in the judiciary1 - The judges of the United States and France, set up legal proceedings against Mr. Strauss-Kahn to the facts of sexuality.It is clear that the French do not undertake procedures after the U.S. judiciary.Or the examination of the complaint of Ms. Banon or the examination of the case known as the Carlton, would not have existed without the U.S. action.2 - The judiciary is made up continuator of the American attack against Mr. Strauss-Kahn. Nobody can tell if it attacks Mr. Strauss-kahn parcequ'elle has enough objective evidence, or if it proclaims to extend these accusations in France American condemnation against him.3 - French judges did not institute proceedings in respect of Mr Sarkozy to the facts of the same characters and a character of the same professional features, social immunity.We note that Mr. Sarkozy is not at all in conflict institutional relations with the U.S. administration.4 - For one, this is persecution. The other is the parainage.5 - This is an inequality before the law, breach of Art. 6 of the Declaration.6 - By his silence on the facts attributed to Mr. Sarkozy, the judiciary shows that it has the guilt frames as it sees fit.In doing so, it extends the action against Mr Sarkozy this member and the Legislature.Mr. Sarkozy wanted to serve on administrative frameworks they are governed by French legal code legal code parallel public.Judges mean that managers will be subject to French law and not by the side of the settling of accounts between frames in which they find themselves. The Mighty and the poor, winners or losers, strong or weak, etc..7 - The judicial policy is therefore out of the public debate, including judiciary. It is a matter of private networks of caste, pressure groups, occult powers, etc..8 - This claim to install the archaic feudal, call it what you will, as a standard of judicial policy, and beyond public life is indeed a subject of debate.12) - ConclusionThe development of procedures for Strauss-Kahn and the absence of proceedings concerning Mr. Sarkozy leads me to recall the merits of the request to open a criminal investigation that I made about the facts alleged by Mrs. William on the alleged rape of a woman, a member of the Constitution, by Mr. Sarkozy.Please accept, Mr. Prosecutor, the assurance of my best regards,Marc Salomone
Sarkozy and Strauss-Kahn, the mirror a couple justice: justice sponsorship / sacrificial justice.
.Paris, Wednesday, February 27, 2013
Copy to:President of the RepublicMadam AttorneyYour Ref. 12/00 282 (quoted in all correspondence)N. No. : -1 - Wednesday, July 4, 2012. Article Chained Duck.2 - Thursday, July 19, 2012, article in the Nouvel Observateur.3 - Thursday, July 19, 2012. Letter to Mr. Prosecutor.4 - Thursday, July 19, 2012. Letter to the President of the Republic.5 - Friday, July 27, 2012, Addendum.6 - Friday, July 27. Letter to the President of the Republic7 - Monday, November 12, 2012. Letter to Mr. Prosecutor8 - Monday, November 12, 2012. Letter to the President of the Republic9 - Thursday, November 29, 2012. Letter to Mr. ProsecutorCopies to the President of the Republic and the Minister of Justice Ms.10 - Monday, December 3, 2012. Letter to Mr. ProsecutorCopies to the President of the Republic and the Minister of Justice Ms.11 - Friday, January 11, 2013. Letter to Mr. ProsecutorCopies to the President of the Republic and the Minister of Justice Ms.12 - Thursday, February 21, 2013. Letter to Mr. ProsecutorCopies to the President of the Republic and the Minister of Justice Ms.
Re: Sarkozy and Strauss-Kahn, the mirror duality judicial justice and justice sacrificial sponsorshipMr. Prosecutor,Title 1: The mirror effect1) - The emergence of evidenceGradually, the judicial treatment, Franco-American, personal acts of Mr. Strauss-Kahn modifies the independent judgment of judges in the judicial treatment of personal acts of Mr. Sarkozy.It is increasingly difficult to conceive as impartial, calm, ordinary judges that protect one another and sacrifice.In fact, the two cases appear homogeneous. They form, conditioning, one by the other. Treating one reflects the other.2) - The homogeneity of filesMr. Strauss-Kahn and Sarkozy have used the same practice, fellatio, with the same type of person, a woman in a position dominated the same behavior, the absolute necessity of the act. They made at the time of the same status as head of state for one and equivalent head of state to another. This equivalence is marked by the same judicial immunity. One is Head of State when he commits the act. The other aspires to the same place when committing similar acts.
The judicial system will accommodate the facts are brought to the attention of judges creates an antagonistic duality. One is destroyed by justice. All sexual activities become criminal. The other is under legal protection which saves any mention of judicial actions. In addition, this protection extends to the whole field of public communication and spares him any public mention of the fact.3) - The mirror effect1 - Immunity rechargable.Protectors Mr Sarkozy may mention two arguements to justify the protection they surround.a-The function of Head of State at the time of the facts, but the immunity argument no longer holds. We saw in our previous papers.Moreover, in this case, it would also apply to Mr. Strauss-Kahn for offenses of pimping. It was at the time of the facts in immunity as head of state General Secretary of the IMF.b-His possible candidacy in 2017. It is so important that he could not be bothered with a history of buttock.2 - The identity conflictThis cascade of apology in conflict with the treatment that Mr. Strauss-Kahn. For him the contrary, each of its functions, or its potential future functions, is an opportunity for qualifying criminal acts of privacy. IMF chief, he still falls for the Sofitel. He may want to reappear, it then falls to the Carlton. He lectures, spontaneous demonstrations are organized.Feminists howl at each of his appearances. The same feminists are silent on the same facts concerning Mr. Sarkozy.In one case, the high office, present and future, protect. In the other, they are a moral reason for criminalization.3 - Politics and parainageBy mirror effect, it is increasingly clear that this protection is similar to a parainage.It is clear that decisions to sacrifice one and protect the other were taken. They are applied. These decisions and this application conflict with the proper exercise of the judicial authority.Title 2: The parallelismHow is this parallelism antagonistic?We will examine two sets of facts that motivated prosecutions against Mr. Strauss-Kahn and he seems well established that they are also due to Mr Sarkozy.a-Fellatiob-pimping.4) - Alternative factsa-Strauss-Kahn went to court for a blowjob imposed.b-The French court questioned fellatio imposed by Mr Sarkozy to a Member.5) - ImmunityAt the time of these events, Mr. Strauss-Kahn is Secretary General of the IMF, it is the same rank as the Heads of State. It enjoys the same immunity.Strauss-Kahn waives its immunity for trial in the criminal trial and prove his innocence. In civil cases, this abandonment of immunity is considered proved.Independently discussions on the value of the immunity it dons Sarkozy, the former Mr. Strauss-Kahn tells us that nothing prevents Mr. Sarkozy to decide himself to answer the questions of justice, s it feels innocent.6) - Justice and elective careerContrary to what we want to believe, court appearances do not affect the career politicians. Most prisoners are re-elected when their civil prohibitions are closed. The facts are there.Therefore:a-Si Mr Sarkozy met its own issues of justice and got a discharge thereof, its image would be improved.b-If Mr. Sarkozy was deemed at fault, it does not necessarily hurt his career elective.This is in response to insults of Judge Salas-researcher.Impediments suffered by Mr. Strauss-kahn on his return to public life seem to be related to forces leaders who want to eliminate. Demonstrated unmanned events during his performance at the Oxford students. Coincidentally, this type of event does not exist on Mr Sarkozy.In any case, its elimination does not match the general case of elected officials convicted in France. Sarkozy, meanwhile, has solidarity with the silence of all network settings, including those who call themselves opponents.It is false to say, as a supported Judge Salas-researcher in the case of Neuilly apartment of Mr Sarkozy, the request to open a criminal investigation into the allegations against Mr Sarkozy can be likened to an aggression against a helpless person, a cabal of marginal against a public figure disarmed.Mr. Salas only take over the ideology of "martyr." According to this ideology, certain categories of people, variously defined, are intended to set causes constant unfounded. These warnings can cause prolonged by criminal actions.
This grotesque farce ideological allows'' eliminate public debate in all its forms, gradually forming the questioners by fools and criminals questioned by people and people above the law and common understanding.Here we find the approach of the people that we are involved in their crime. This particular goal delinquent also claim a special place, feudal in law enforcement.
7) - Prostitution and Pimping1 - The equivalence of qualificationsMr. Stauss-a-kahn is indicted for pimping. He participated in the gathering of prostitutes in one place for to use in meetings.b-At the time of these events, Mr. Strauss-Kahn is Secretary General of the IMF, it is the same rank as the heads of state, it enjoys the same immunity.c-Mr Sarkozy delivered a formal prostitution of a woman who has not made elected MP for grants by blowjobs.2 - Sarkozy and prostitutiona-Prostitution has been since the subsidy payment became a sexual act became a happening.b-Pimping is characterized for the fact of the creation of prostitution, the protection afforded to the fact, the benefit of institutional policy that draws Sarkozy. Setting prostitution of a Member that does not ejaculate.c-The hotel pimping is proved by the invitation to the lady in prostitution during follow Mr. Sarkozy put in a room with this provision.The d-band organized pimping is possible. There is credible evidence that this lady was not placed there for public reception by chance.This requirement of e-fellatio is above all a political act.f-The abuse of weakness is obvious. It is known that Mr. Sarkozy member to need this grant. It is itself vulnerable, which is why it was probably chosen. Mrs. William says itself a strong woman does not accept this kind of market. The honorable member pays his weakness. It would be improper.On this point: "Prostitution particularly vulnerable, the law punishes three years in prison and 45,000 euros fine soliciting, accepting or obtaining, in exchange for remuneration or a promise to pay, sex from a person who engages in prostitution, including occasionally, when this person has a particular vulnerability, apparent or known to the perpetrator. For example: a person with an illness, infirmity, physical or mental disability or who is pregnant. Article 225-12-1 second paragraph of the Penal Code. "3 - ComparisonA-Strauss-Kahn was indicted for pimping agravé and organized gang.I do not party here on qualifications. They are legal.Judges accuse Strauss-Kahn:a-To have with women is notoriously prostitutes.b-Having established a network of people on the pretext of friendly services formed a team of professionals rabatage for evenings priced in favor of Mr. Strauss-Kahn.I do not betray their argument.B-Notwithstanding the upcoming trial, Strauss-Kahn was indicted for violation of a purely formal principle prohibited. It directly affects person.He has sex sessions with people who need to be paid. They are professionals. Adults are willing to pay and to provide sexual.C-Sarkozy's use of its power to compel them:-A woman was in a weak position to give him a blowjob. It is not free.Which leads, rape, prostitution, pimping, pandering hotel, abuse of weakness and probable gang.b-A MP to submit to his desire.Causing the aggression against the Executive Branch Legislative Branch, the rape of the constitution.D-The person is not sucking prostitutuée or consent. She is a Member. She is forced.8) - cross AffairsA-The forced blowjobs1 - Strauss-kahn gets sucked under the Sofitel hotel guest also rank Head of State. The woman said she was forced.2 - Mr. Sarkozy is sucking force at the Elysee Palace as President.3 - Mr. Strauss-Kahn is considered by U.S. courts. It recognizes that it does not place and led to pay a large sum to compensate its prosecution.4 - Mr. Sarkozy has an unwavering solidarity of the judiciary and politics. It does not stop there. It benefits from the solidarity of feminists and women executives who are related to this case.5 - Mrs. William reported this case.a-From all participants, it is the only one to do so. While this is a public affair.b-It takes the most hackneyed refrain from the subjugation of women. She says it is the fault of the woman, since she is left to do, and who wants to can.c-Two centuries of feminist struggles to get there.d-It takes up the theme of the service obligation. It does not say that everything is set by law, but to conceal the fact that the rape of a member is a constitutional issue and therefore legal and not a matter of changing habits.B-prostitution and proxénétismes1 - Strauss-Kahn sex with hookers to be aware and demanding. No material no direct evidence that he knew the work of its partners. The firm conviction of judges is respectable, but it remains a conviction.2 - Mr. Sarkozy as an MP in prostitutée. He made public in the exercise of its functions, witnessed. It seems that there is no doubt as to the accuracy of the report of the facts. He took advantage of the weakness of the member itself known. He moved to pimp, pimp hotel. It is plausible that this session has mobilized an organized gang.4 - Mr. Strauss-Kahn is accountable to justice.He was summoned to courtb He is indictedc-All judicial chain is mobilized.5 - Mr. Sarkozy has no account, of any kind, to make justice.9) - The legal effect backFor two sets of identical criminal offenses attributable to men of the same social and professional conditions, justice orientations gives two actions perfectly dissimilar and contradictory.These guidelines are not due to different assessments of similar facts. Indeed, for a justice occurs. For the other it refuses to rule on requests for review before it.Publicity of a lawsuit for one. For another, the silence of the judges, their refusal to declare informed.However, for this procedure to Mr. Strauss-Kahn, judges can no longer say:a-stories buttocks leaders do not concern them,b-executives can not be appointed criminals, rapists and a fortiori.c-prostitution and pimping only concern thugs Eastern Dodo or Brine.d-persons of rank of Head of State are not criminal in their concerns.They shall not remain silent for Sarkozy. They have no legitimacy to the judicial or law, or jurisprudence.More the case Strauss-Kahn will change and it will show that the gap between it and requests for investigation into Mr Sarkozy is not the court but the protection of a suspected criminal.Judges do not make two different judgments, nor open two different procedures. For the same category of offense under homogeneous conditions, they seem to pick on a man and protect another.10) - The Constitution1 - breach of the principle of equalityThis difference in treatment is a breach of equality before the law. In this case art. 6 of the Declaration is violated.- "(The law) must be the same for all, whether it protects or punishes. 'Article VILaw is the expression of the general will. All citizens have the right to participate personally, or through their representatives, in its formation. It must be the same for all, whether it protects or punishes. All citizens, being equal in its eyes, are equally admissible to all public dignities, places, and employments, according to their capacity and without other distinction than that of their virtues and talents.2 - The comment:Article by Professor Jacques ROBERT "The principle of equality in the French constitutional law" (The specifications of the Constitutional Council No. 3, 1997)"Article 6 of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789 (which, from the famous decision of 16 July 1971, is part of the" constitutionality block "which confronts the French Constitutional Council laws that has to be examined).But this Article 6 states that "the law must be the same for all" principle that the Council nevertheless admitting modulations relaxed when they are based on objective criteria and ration sionals in light of the objective pursued by the legislator and that this is itself neither unconstitutional nor vitiated by a manifest error of assessment; "3 - modulations:A-The Constitutional Council has admitted modulations.a-When they are based on objective and rational in light of the objective pursued by the legislator;b-What is the objective itself:- Neither unconstitutional,- Neither vitiated by a manifest error of assessment;
B-In this case the "modulations" proposed by the judges in the practice of inequality before the law of the two aforementioned executives are not based on "objective criteria"11) - The internal conflict in the judiciary1 - The judges of the United States and France, set up legal proceedings against Mr. Strauss-Kahn to the facts of sexuality.It is clear that the French do not undertake procedures after the U.S. judiciary.Or the examination of the complaint of Ms. Banon or the examination of the case known as the Carlton, would not have existed without the U.S. action.2 - The judiciary is made up continuator of the American attack against Mr. Strauss-Kahn. Nobody can tell if it attacks Mr. Strauss-kahn parcequ'elle has enough objective evidence, or if it proclaims to extend these accusations in France American condemnation against him.3 - French judges did not institute proceedings in respect of Mr Sarkozy to the facts of the same characters and a character of the same professional features, social immunity.We note that Mr. Sarkozy is not at all in conflict institutional relations with the U.S. administration.4 - For one, this is persecution. The other is the parainage.5 - This is an inequality before the law, breach of Art. 6 of the Declaration.6 - By his silence on the facts attributed to Mr. Sarkozy, the judiciary shows that it has the guilt frames as it sees fit.In doing so, it extends the action against Mr Sarkozy this member and the Legislature.Mr. Sarkozy wanted to serve on administrative frameworks they are governed by French legal code legal code parallel public.Judges mean that managers will be subject to French law and not by the side of the settling of accounts between frames in which they find themselves. The Mighty and the poor, winners or losers, strong or weak, etc..7 - The judicial policy is therefore out of the public debate, including judiciary. It is a matter of private networks of caste, pressure groups, occult powers, etc..8 - This claim to install the archaic feudal, call it what you will, as a standard of judicial policy, and beyond public life is indeed a subject of debate.12) - ConclusionThe development of procedures for Strauss-Kahn and the absence of proceedings concerning Mr. Sarkozy leads me to recall the merits of the request to open a criminal investigation that I made about the facts alleged by Mrs. William on the alleged rape of a woman, a member of the Constitution, by Mr. Sarkozy.Please accept, Mr. Prosecutor, the assurance of my best regards,Marc Salomone
Inscription à :
Articles (Atom)