Grant a full pardon and reprieve now, for Scott Davis, of Pennsylvania.
0 have signed. Let’s get to 100!
Revised March 19, 2018, and originally published in
the year 2012:
Elected public officials must be held to their oath to preserve,
protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
The public, and the national image of the United States, are
directly dependent on the integrity of the Oath of Office
(and indelibly harmed by this prosecutorial fraud,
"CP-36-CR-0053-2010) . Whenever a State violates the
Article IV, Section Four Constitutional
clause calling for republican form of government, it is the duty
of the Federal Government to act as the guarantor of
Constitutional government, without delay. CP-36-CR-0053-2010
is an underreported Constitution-shredding. The Federal
government has stood by and done nothing during the Obama
years. Now the same default of responsibility is clearly being
re-enacted under the post-Obama Administration. The
The Federal Government has not acted diligently, or at all,
with any attention to their sworn obligation to use their
duty and power to restore the Constitution in this case,
most notably upon reasonable request. Instead,
the Federal government has stubbornly turned their back on
their Article Four, Section Four Republican Form Clause
and Fifth Article Full Faith and Credit obligation to
clear responsibility to make Pennsylvania officials behave
in a way which is Constitutionally congruent. The Federal
Government has enabled and extended prosecutorial
repression in Pennsylvania, including alteration of records
by a probation officer whose conduct is a reminder of the
misconduct of prosecutorial officials in the Dreyfus Affair.
The absurd Pennsylvania case against Scott Davis violated the
Constitution of the United States, (not to mention Pennsylvania
law) from stem to stern, and chronologically would "be a joke"
if the results of this abuse of process were not so damaging.
It is a cruel joke, and all State officials are hereby put on notice
to stop perpetrating it in the name of the Constitution of the
Pretexts of "Child protection" must not be a coy pretext for:
undue invasion of privacy, or retaliation against witnesses
in the context of the filing of preceding reports (see page 80
of the tragic child-welfare book by Anne Fadiman,
"The Spirit Catches You And You Fall Down" - this classic is
hankie territory!) especially in the shadow of any Federal
child labor investigation which is later proven to have been
vindicated by the subsequent death of a child. The conduct
of the falsely accused defendant in CP-36-CR-0053-2010
is supportive of child labor law protections against abuse
going back to the 1910 Pennsylvania Child Labor Act, and
including the work of the Secretary of Labor during FDR's
Administration, Frances Perkins.
See the article in the Press Of Atlantic City:
"Boy, 3, Drowns After Falling Into Grease Trap Outside Vineland Market"
By JOEL LANDAU Staff Writer, May 18, 2011.
Child protection pretexts must never be used as a means to
discredit and destroy a witness who, by law, is absolutely
entitled to legal protection. Trumping up of a child protective
mega-falsehood meant to obstruct more compelling
and seriously needed child labor investigations amounted
to a wholesale negation of child protection in re
There has never been any harm to any child as a result of
any actions or words of the accused. Clearly, Governor
Wolf has an obligation to end the impairment of his most
solemn contract, his Oath of Office, which is the State's
highest contract, by way of failing to support instant
restoration of all Constitutional rights of the falsely accused
teacher in this case.
Prosecutors and judges - and arresting officers - must never
use hearsay as evidence, as they did here. Furthermore,
officials should never accuse someone of salaciousness
or prurient criminal intent where there is none and where there
is no proof of any such thing: To use the defendant's advice
to a student to read the Sermon on the Mount to do this,
as "forensic expert" and malicious prosecutor Braden Cook
of the State Attorney General's Office actually did in this case,
on January 5, 2011 !
Children, in any legal child protection context, must not be
exposed to much more damaging levels of prosecutorial harm
than the level of anything alleged against a defendant, in the
methods used to prosecute a case (in this wrongful prosecution,
Government behavior was rather like hiring an exterminator
to get rid of flies in a house that has none,
whereupon the exterminator, in order to justify his contract,
fires a missile at the living room wall in order to make sure
the house is rid of flies - and then makes up a series of
tall tales and absolute lies to justify the damage inflicted
unnecessarily and negligently). Finally, politicians and politically
selected judges who grossly manufacture, distort and grandstand
issues of child protection in a way that is phony, and in a way
that is destructive and refuted by any honest chronology.
In this Constitution-shredding case, a judge claimed without
merit that he wanted to "send a message" which is unexplained
and is not justified by the facts or the law; he should be ordered
by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to overturn his own guilty
verdict in this case which he arrived at based not on law but on
prejudicial aspects. The courthouse in this case, Lancaster
County Courthouse in Pennsylvania, has been attempting to
justify its use of unconstitutional ex post facto law and the
daily violation of Article One, Section Ten of the Constitution
of the United States, by Pennsylvania government.
Other replete violations must be investigated, held to account,
and Government must be made to compensate Scott Davis
for all crimes committed against Scott Davis by Government.
Restitution should be granted swiftly to Scott Davis and to all
people who are wrongfully prosecuted in an unjustified and
unduly damaging manner, in which due process is
thrown to the wind (see the 52-part Pardon and Reprieve lists),
and possibly at that, at the behest of the most ruthlessly powerful
official in the State, (who at the time was Tom Corbett) whose
reaction to a knowingly weak case was not to drop the case,
but to obstruct justice on behalf of the accused, and to
defame the accused in a way which seems calculated to have
endangered the life of the accused (a violation of the Bill of
Attainder clauses of the Constitution of the United States)
and to have made a fair trial and fair appeals process
out of the question, for all practical purposes. It is for such
instances of prosecutorial malfeasance and misfeasance
that the Constitution provides that "there shall be pardons"
(quoting State Representative Mark B. Cohen, hearings on
Article Four, Section Nine Pennsylvania Constitution revision
or amendment. The constitutionality of Article Four, Section
Nine of the Pennsylvania constitution was the subject of
hearings and ballot questions which have amounted to a
great big mess. The Governor has an obligation to disregard
this Constitution-shredding verbiage in the Pennsylvania
constitution and proceed to grant reprieves and pardons
unilaterally, as he has authority to do by dint of the Constitution
of the United States, Article Two, Section Two Pardons Clause
and Article Four, Section Four, Republican Form Clause).
This endangerment of an innocent whistleblower; this
prosecutorial hoax, and the pathetic State slander of a
good teacher who has more to offer the world than to be
made into a bearskin rug at the feet of the fireplace of
out-of-control prosecutors) is Constitutionally repugnant
under Article One, Sections One, Eight and Ten inter alia,
Article Four, Article Six and Amendments the First, Fourth,
Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth inter alia. It is important
for the President to protect the processes of justice and
integrity in Government, and to restore the dignity and
protect the life of this innocent, beloved, gentlemanly,
kind, talented, benificent,highly skilled teacher and
near-lethally impoverished honest citizen; and to restore
to thousands of people their trust in humanity, their own
confidence in their sense of trust, and their trust in
Government in their own country, the United States.
It is essential now, in 2018 that Governor Tom Wolf
overturn the list of Constitutional violations which
CP-36-CR-0053-2010 has become, simply by granting
a pardon on the basis of these Constitutional provisions
herein listed as having been violated in Commonwealth
v. Scott Davis, August 21, 2009 and March 16, 2010.
It is ridiculous for an innocent man to wait over eight and
a half years for restoration of justice while his life is torn
apart by crimes committed by, and at the behest of,
Government agencies and subordinate levels of the State.
Please sign and share this petition with the news media,
with your State legislators in Pennsylvania or in any other
State, with the US Department of Justice, with the US
Pardon Attorney, and with all good people.
Send a message to the White House, no matter
who is President, that "in America, the Law is King."
Today: Scott is counting on you
Scott Davis needs your help with “Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf, backed by Lieutenant Governor Mike Stack, Pennsylvania State Attorney General Josh Shapiro, and other relevant officials: Grant a full pardon and reprieve now, for Scott Davis. in re CP-36-CR-0053-2010”. Join Scott and 4 supporters today.