UNITED STATES DISRTICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
vs.

CASE: 14CV1025 RB/SMV

CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE
Defendant,
ANTOINE TONY PIRARD, et. al.
Intervener,
AMICUS CURIAE (FRIEND OF THE COURT) BRIEF OF
ANTOINE TONY PIRARD, et. al. AND AMERICAN LIBERTY LAW ASSIST
IN SUPPORT TO DISMISS ON THE GROUND THAT THE CONSTITUTION AND
LAW IS BREACHED (VIOLATED) IN THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
COME NOW, Mr. Antoine Pirard, et. al. (Pro Se), contending that the UNITED STATES
OF AMERICA and the CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE breached the Settlement Agreement.

Settlement Agreement
I. INTRODUCTION (on page 5)
The United States of America and the City of Albuquerque (collectively the Parties)
share a mutual interest in officer safety and accountability; constitutional, effective policing; and
high-quality police services. They join together in entering into this agreement (Agreement) to
ensure that the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) delivers police services that comply
with the Constitution and laws of the United States and to further their mutual interests.
Rule 24 (b) (B) has a claim or defense that shares with the main action a common question of
law or fact.
1

Law

What is Law?
All the rules of conduct established and enforced by the Supreme Authority, found in

the United States Constitution a government of the people, by the people, for the people and
Law (USC) for our servant (Government Officials), employed by the will of We the People.
The condition existing when obedience to such rules is general: to establish Law and order
for the American Citizens and our servants (Government Officials).
FACT

The Constitution is a government of the people, by the people, for the people

We the People the American Citizens by ratification (approval) as per Article V of the
Constitution in effect March 4, 1789 - The Preamble is very clear
and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity
Posterity n (formal)
1.
L iberty

all future generations

2.

all of somebodys descendants

Liberty n

1. the freedom to think or act without being constrained by necessity or force

2. freedom from captivity or slavery
3. any of the political, social, and economic rights that belong to the citizens of a state or
to all people (often used in the plural) See also civil liberties
4. an action or remark that violates the polite distance usually left between individuals,
and that may strike the person at whom it is directed as insultingly familiar
Encarta World English Dictionary 1999 Microsoft Corporation. Developed for Microsoft by
Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.

II. BACKGROUND (on page 7)

6. This Agreement is effectuated under the authority granted to the Department of
Justice under Section 14141 to seek declaratory or equitable relief to remedy a pattern or practice
of conduct by law enforcement officers that deprives individuals of rights, privileges, or
immunities secured by the Constitution or federal law (Title 42 1983).
Rule 24 (b) (B) has a claim or defense that shares with the main action a common
question of law or fact.
Law USC 42 Sec. 1983 Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights
Every person who, under Color of Law of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom
(executive orders), or usage, of any State subjects, or causes to be subjected, any person within
the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by
the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law.

II. BACKGROUND (on page 7)

7. This Agreement is not intended to limit the lawful authority of APD officers to
use objectively reasonable force or otherwise to fulfill their law enforcement obligations
under the Constitution and laws of the United States and the State of New Mexico.
Rule 24 (b) (B) has a claim or defense that shares with the main action a common
question of law or fact.
Law

What is Law?
All the rules of conduct established and enforced by the Supreme Authority, found in

the United States Constitution a government of the people, by the people, for the people and
Law (USC) for our servant (Government Officials), employed by the will of We the People.
3

The condition existing when obedience to such rules is general: to establish Law and order
for the American Citizens and our servants (Government Officials).
FACT

The Constitution is a government of the people, by the people, for the people

We the People the American Citizen by ratification (approval) as per Article V of the
Constitution in effect March 4, 1789 - The Preamble is very clear
and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity
Posterity n (formal)
1.

all future generations

2.

all of somebodys descendants (includes you)

Encarta World English Dictionary 1999 Microsoft Corporation. Developed for Microsoft by
Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.

IV. USE OF FORCE: INTERNAL CONTROLS AND ACCOUNTABILITY

A. Use of Force Principles (on page 15)
15. APD shall develop and implement an overarching agency-wide use of force
policy that complies with applicable law and comports with best practices. The use of force
policy shall include all force techniques, technologies, and weapons, both lethal and less lethal,
that are available to APD officers, including authorized weapons, and weapons that are made
available only to specialized units. The use of force policy shall clearly define and describe each
force option and the factors officers should consider in determining which use of such force is
appropriate. The use of force policy will incorporate the use of force principles and factors
articulated above and shall specify that the use of unreasonable force will subject officers to
discipline, possible criminal prosecution,
prosecution and/or civil liability.
liability
4

Rule 24 (b) (B) has a claim or defense that shares with the main action a common
question of law or fact.
The Law is established Fact
Miranda Warning
The United States Supreme Court requires that the Police and Courts continue to
follow the Miranda warnings. The Supreme Court reaffirmed Miranda v. Arizona declared
statutes unconstitutional. The Court held Miranda v. Arizona constitutionally based and
states a constitutional rule
Therefore, the court held that Congress could not legislatively supersede the Supreme
Court decisions interpreting and applying the Constitution. If the court had ruled otherwise,
Congress and the states would have had the authority to eliminate protecting constitutional
rights requirements in the Miranda warnings This is a constitutional matter. Congress and
state Legislators cannot change it. We used the word Constitution. We applied it to the states, so
we must have thought it was indeed a constitutional ruling.
Ninth Circuit ruling found police in Southern California trained to do questioning
outside of Miranda. That lends to a culture of lawlessness within the police departments. The
court found the training in violation of the Fifth Amendment. Police are there to uphold the
law, and that includes, the laws of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments and all of the protections
of the Constitution. We required the safeguards of the Miranda warning unless and until we
can come up with something better. The reality is that Miranda is easy for police to follow and
creates a presumption of admissibility so long as officers comply with it.
The court went on to define that local, state, and federal law enforcement officers,
(Judicial Officers/Personnel) are committing unlawful actions against the American
5

Citizen(s), by the enforcement of the laws (statutes) unlawfully and are personally liable
for their actions.
From the writings of Erwin Chemerinsky, American Liberty Law Director, and Associates
Law

United States Codes USC (Law)

Remedy for the people when rights violated, the Law for servant(s) criminal prosecution
USC 18 Sec. 241 Conspiracy Against Rights
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any
State in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right they shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned not more than ten years, or both
USC 18 Sec. 242 Deprivation of Rights under Color of Law
Whoever, under Color of Law, statute, ordinance, regulation or custom (executive orders),
willfully subjects any person in any State the deprivation of any rights shall be fined under this
title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both
USC 18 Sec. 2381 Treason
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their
enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of
treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined
under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office
under the United States.
USC 18 Sec. 2382 Misprision of Treason (Concealment)
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any
treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the
same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge
6

or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this
title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both.
USC 42 Sec. 1983 Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights
Every person who, under Color of Law of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom (executive
orders), or usage, of any State subjects, or causes to be subjected, any person within the
jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the
Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law.

VIII. MISCONDUCT COMPLAINT INTAKE, INVESTIGATION, AND ADJUDICATION

D. Investigation of Complaints (on page 61)
186. APD and the City shall develop and implement protocols to ensure that criminal and
administrative investigations of APD personnel are kept appropriately separate, to protect APD
personnels rights under the Fifth Amendment. When an APD employee affirmatively refuses to
give a voluntary statement and APD has probable cause to believe the person has committed a
crime, APD shall consult with the prosecuting agency (e.g., District Attorneys Office or USAO)
and seek the approval of the Chief before taking a compelled statement.
187. Advisements by the Internal Affairs Bureau or the Civilian Police Oversight
Agency to APD personnel of their Fifth Amendment rights shall only be given where there is a
reasonable likelihood of a criminal investigation or prosecution of the subject employee.
Rule 24 (b) (B) has a claim or defense that shares with the main action a common
question of law or fact.

Government Officials breach the trust in office a violation of the Constitution.

7

Definition: servant (civil and / or public) is somebody in the public employ. A servant is in
service (employed) by the will of We the People the American Citizen (Masters) the author
(creator) of the Constitution, having full Authority and Power by means of ratification.

A servant has no rights, unable to plead the 5th, and Garrity does not apply.
Servants (Government Officials) serve at the pleasure of We the People the American Citizens

F.

Staffing and Training Requirements (on page 65-77)

Rule 24 (b) (B) has a claim or defense that shares with the main action a common
question of law or fact.
Miranda warnings
The United States Supreme Court requires that the Police and Courts continue to
follow the Miranda warnings. The Supreme Court reaffirmed Miranda v. Arizona declared
statutes unconstitutional for We the People a.k.a. American Citizens. The Court held
Miranda v. Arizona constitutionally based and states a constitutional rule
Therefore, the court held that Congress could not legislatively supersede the Supreme
Court decisions interpreting and applying the Constitution. If the court had ruled otherwise,
Congress and the states would have had the authority to eliminate protecting constitutional
rights requirements in the Miranda warnings This is a constitutional matter. Congress and
state Legislators cannot change it. We used the word Constitution. We applied it to the states, so
we must have thought it was indeed a constitutional ruling.
Ninth Circuit ruling found police in Southern California trained to do questioning
outside of Miranda. That lends to a culture of lawlessness within the police departments.
8

The court found the training in violation of the Fifth Amendment. Police are there to
uphold the law, and that includes, the laws of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments and all of the
protections of the Constitution. We required the safeguards of the Miranda warning unless and
until we can come up with something better. The reality is that Miranda is easy for police to
follow and creates a presumption of admissibility so long as officers comply with it.
The court went on to define that local, state, and federal law enforcement officers,
(Judicial Officers/Personnel) are committing unlawful actions against the American
Citizen(s), by the enforcement of the laws (statutes) unlawfully and are personally liable
for their actions.
344. Settlement Agreement (on page 104)
This Agreement is enforceable only by the Parties. No person or entity is
intended to be a third-party beneficiary of the provisions of this Agreement for purposes of any
civil, criminal, or administrative action. Accordingly, no person or entity may assert any claim
or right as a beneficiary or protected class under this Agreement.

Rule 24 (b) (B) has a claim or defense that shares with the main action a common
question of law or fact.
Government Officials breach the trust in office a violation of the Constitution.
a government of the people, by the people, for the people
Government Officials a.k.a. (also known as) servants take an oath (affirmation) to support the
Constitution and Law (USC), found in violate known as a BREACH OF DUTY.
Constitution Oath (Affirmation) requirements:
9

Article VI.

"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the

several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States
and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution;
but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust
under the United States."
Definition: servant (civil and / or public) is somebody in the public employ. A servant is in
service (employed) by the will of We the People the American Citizen (Masters) the author
(creator) of the Constitution, having full Authority and Power by means of ratification.
Law

United States Codes USC (Law)

Remedy for the people when rights violated, the Law for servant(s) criminal prosecution
USC 18 Sec. 241 Conspiracy Against Rights
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any
State in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right they shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned not more than ten years, or both
USC 18 Sec. 242 Deprivation of Rights under Color of Law
Whoever, under Color of Law, statute, ordinance, regulation or custom (executive orders),
willfully subjects any person in any State the deprivation of any rights shall be fined under this
title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both
USC 18 Sec. 2381 Treason
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their
enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of
treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined

10

under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office
under the United States.
USC 18 Sec. 2382 Misprision of Treason (Concealment)
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any
treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the
same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge
or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this
title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both.
USC 42 Sec. 1983 Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights
Every person who, under Color of Law of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom (executive
orders), or usage, of any State subjects, or causes to be subjected, any person within the
jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the
Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law.
In Summary
The Settlement Agreement has doubled standard language and in violation of the
Constitution and the Laws.
double standard n
a principle, rule, or expectation that is applied unfairly to different groups, one group usually
being condemned for the slightest offense while the other is treated far more leniently
Encarta World English Dictionary 1999 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Developed for Microsoft by Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.
In agreement and in compliance with the Constitution and Laws

11

I. INTRODUCTION (on page 5)

delivers police services that comply with the Constitution and laws of the United
States and to further their mutual interests.

In Disagreement and not in compliance and in violation of the Constitution and Laws
344. Settlement Agreement (on page 104)
This Agreement is enforceable only by the Parties. No person or entity is
intended to be a third-party beneficiary of the provisions of this Agreement for purposes of any
civil, criminal, or administrative action. Accordingly, no person or entity may assert any claim
or right as a beneficiary or protected class under this Agreement.

In I. INTRODUCTION on page 5 the document is in comply with the Constitution and Laws,
then in 344. Settlement Agreement (on page 104) is unlawfully and removes any opportunity
therefore eliminates justice for all by not allowing any person or entity intended to be a thirdparty beneficiary of the provisions of this Agreement for the purposes of any civil, criminal, or
administrative action.
The Practice of Law
"The practice of law is an occupation of common right." A bar card is not a license, its a dues
card and/or membership card. A bar association is that what it is, a club, A association is not
license, it has a certificate though the State, the two are not the same....
Platsky v. C.I.A. 953 F.2d. 25.
"The practice of law can not be licensed by any state/State.
Schware v.Board of Examiners, United States Reports 353 U.S. pgs. 238, 239.
12

In Sims v.Aherns, 271 S.W. 720 (1925)

Additionally, pro se litigants are to be given reasonable opportunity to remedy the defects in
their pleadings.
Reynoldson v. Shillinger 907F .2d 124, 126 (10th Cir. 1990);
See also Jaxon v. Circle K. Corp. 773 F.2d 1138, 1140 (10th Cir. 1985) (1)
NAACP v. Button (371 U.S. 415);
United Mineworkers of America v. Gibbs (383 U.S. 715);
and Johnson v. Avery 89 S. Ct. 747 (1969).
Members of groups who are competent nonlawyers can assist other members of the group
achieve the goals of the group in court without being changed with Unauthorized practice of
law.
"They saw all the consequences in the principle and they avoided the consequences
by denying the principle."

- James Madison
In Conclusion

The Constitution oath (affirmation) is of extreme concern of Law.

To take an oath (affirmation) to support the Constitution is a promise of trust to comply.
Violation of an Oath (affirmation) is Perjury
The Constitution, Art. II Sec. 4, "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and
Misdemeanors". The phrase "high crimes and misdemeanors" and its meaning to the Framers,
and found that the key to understanding it is the word "high". It does not mean "more serious". It
refers to those punishable offenses that only apply to high persons, that is, to public officials, and
13

/ or Government Officials those who, because of their official status, are under special
obligations that ordinary persons are not under, and which could not be meaningfully applied or
justly punished if committed by ordinary persons.
Perjury is usually defined as "lying under oath". That is not quite right. The original meaning
was "violation of one's oath (or affirmation)".
The word "perjury" is usually defined today as "lying under oath about a material
matter", but that is not its original or complete meaning, which is "violation of an oath". We can
see this by consulting the original Latin from which the term comes. From An Elementary Latin
Dictionary, by Charlton T. Lewis (1895), Note that the letter "j" is the letter "i" in Latin.
periurium, i, n,, a false oath, perjury.
periurus, adj., oath-breaking, false to vows, perjured. iuro, avi, atus, are, to swear, take
an oath.
iurator, oris, m., a swearer.
iuratus, adj., sworn under oath, bound by an oath.
ius, iuris, that which is binding, right, justice, duty.
per, ... IV. Of means or manner, through, by, by means of, ... under pretense of, by the
pretext of, ....
When a person takes an oath (or affirmation) before giving testimony, he is assuming the role of
an official, that of "witness under oath", for the duration of his testimony. That official position
entails a special obligation to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and in that

14

capacity, one is punishable in a way he would not be as an ordinary person not under oath.
Therefore, perjury is a high crime.
It should be noted, however, that when an offense against a statute is also a "high crime or
misdemeanor", it may be, and usually is, referred to by a different name, when considered as
such. Thus, an offense like "obstruction of justice" or "subornation of perjury" may become
"abuse of authority" when done by an official bound by oath. As such, it would be grounds
for impeachment and removal from office, but would be punishable by its statutory name
once the official is out of office.
An executive official (Government Officials) is ultimately responsible for any failures of his
subordinates and for their violations of the oath he and they took, which means violations of the
Constitution and the rights of persons (American Citizens). It is not necessary to be able to
prove that such failures or violations occurred at his instigation or with his knowledge, to be
able, in Starr's words, to "lay them at the feet" of the president. It is sufficient to show, on the
preponderance of evidence, that the president was aware of misconduct on the part of his
subordinates, or should have been, and failed to do all he could to remedy the misconduct,
including termination and prosecution of the subordinates and compensation for the victims
or their heirs. The president's subordinates include everyone in the executive branch, and their
agents and contractors. It is not limited to those over whom he has direct supervision. He is not
protected by "plausible deniability". He is legally responsible for everything that everyone in
the executive branch is doing.
Therefore, the appropriate subject matter for an impeachment and removal proceeding is the full
range of offenses against the Constitution and against the rights of persons committed by
15

subordinate officials and their agents, which have not been adequately investigated or remedied.
The massacre at Waco, the assault at Ruby Ridge, and many, many other illegal or excessive
assaults by federal agents, and the failure of the president to take action against the offenders, is
more than enough to justify impeachment and removal from office on grounds of dereliction of
duty. To these we could add the many suspicious incidents that indicate covered up crimes by
federal agents, including the suspicious deaths of persons suspected of being knowledgeable of
wrongdoing by the president or others in the executive branch, or its contractors.
Perjury is a criminal offense a Breach of Duty and we request an
independent prosecutor(s) for criminal prosecution in reference to the Settlement Agreement.
If youve been naughty, now is the time to clean up your act.
If you must, resign and go in peace and clean up your act.

16

Hereunto subscribe,
Use purple ink [for royalty] or blue ink [for admiralty].
Royalty (self-government) a government of the people, by the people, for the people,
Supreme Authority, at all times, under all circumstances
Admiralty / Corporation (Government Officials) ONLY.

No line under signature, in honor of founding documents and above UCC 1-308

Respectfully Submitted

UCC 1-308

UCC 1-308

Mr. Antoine Pirard, et. al. (Pro Se)

Cipriano L. Roybal, Director

604 N. Heaton Lp. SE

American Liberty Law and

Los Lunas, N. Mex. [87031]

Associates National and International

505-866-5453

P.O. Box 12927

Albuquerque, N. Mex. [87195]

17