Restore Grand Jury Rights

In the Supreme Court of the United States

Petitioners

PeaceMaker Aldo and Concerned Citizens

V.

Respondents

Virginia Beach, Virginia - Sheriff Holcomb, Chief Judge Lewis, Commonwealth Attorney Colin Stolle, Mayor Dyer, & other local, state, and federal officials et al.

On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari

Peacemaker Aldo

2500 Shorehaven Drive, Virginia Beach, VA 23454

757.392.4789

Questions Presented

1. Does evident manipulation of our grand jury system, contrary to its constitutionally intended role as a "protector of citizens against arbitrary and oppressive governmental actions," as affirmed by Justice Scalia in United States v. Williams (1992), violate the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments' due process guarantees, as exemplified by:

   • The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Nos. 24-1269 and 1843 October 24, 2024 rulings;

   • Ongoing law enforcement abuses like the Rolin Hill homicide cover-up; and

   • The prolonged lawfare against President Trump and others affiliated with him?

2. Does the evident prioritization of government and "Bar Mafia" interests over citizens' due process rights, as seen in recent cases in Virginia Beach and beyond, erode our Constitution's promise of equal justice under law and undermine the framers' “original intent” that governance must serve its citizens, necessitating non-governmental citizen grand jury oversight to restore integrity and secure these rights?

3. As affirmed in Printz v. United States (1997), does the role of our sheriff as the highest law enforcement officer in every county or county equivalent necessitate their authority and duty to ensure non-government citizen grand jury oversight as an essential mechanism to restore due process, secure constitutional rights, and ensure accountability at all levels of government?

List of Parties and Related Cases

Concerned citizens will be identified as security issues are addressed. All parties on the cover page and:

Peter V. Chiusano, Kristi A. Wooten, Mark S. Smith, Roger J. Griffin, Stephen C. Mahan, Steven C. Frucci, Leslie L. Lilley, A. Bonwill Shockley, Michael E. McGinty, Louis R. Lerner, Randall D. Smith, Daniel R. Lahne, Jessica D. Aber, Tina E. Sinnen, David A. Vitto, Matthew R. Hamel, Gary T. Settle, Jerome Grate.

(28 USC 2403A & Other) Solicitor General of the United States

(28 USC 2403B & Other) Jason Miyares, Virginia Attorney General

Related Cases

• Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals No. 24-1269

• Dibelardino v. Miyares, No. 2:23-cv-00225-JKW-LRL (E.D. Va. Mar. 4, 2024)

• Virginia Beach Circuit Court CL20-5287, CL22-2014, CL22-2015, CL22-5417

• Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals No. 24-1843

• Virginia Beach Circuit Court CL24-1585, CL24-2865, CL24-5843

• Virginia Beach General District Court GC24-7297

Table of Contents

1. Questions Presented

2. List of Parties and Related Cases

3. Index of Appendices

4. Table of Authorities Cited

5. Opinions Below

6. Jurisdiction and Timing

7. Constitutional and Statutory Provisions

8. Opening Statement

9. Statement of the Case

10. Reasons for Granting the Petition

11. Conclusion

12. Transparency and Public Access:

Related petitions including First Amendment public signature petition(s) with calls for local action to restore our grand jury's constitutional role as a safeguard for justice and liberty are posted at:

• RestoreGrandJuryRights.org

• PeacemakerSheriff.org

• JusticeForRolin.org

Index to Appendices

Appendix A: Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion No. 24-1843

Appendix B: Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals No. 24-1843 Petition for Writ of Mandamus

Appendix C: Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion No. 24-1269

Appendix D: Virginia Beach Circuit Court CL24-5834 Filing

Table of Authorities

CASES

• United States v. Williams, 504 U.S. 36 (1992): Grand jury as an independent safeguard against government overreach.

• Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997): Sheriffs’ constitutional duty and authority.

• United States v. Throckmorton, 98 U.S. 61 (1878): Fraud vitiates even solemn judgments.

• Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238 (1944): Fraud upon the court undermines judicial integrity.

• Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct., 542 U.S. 367 (2004): Mandamus as an extraordinary remedy.

Code

• Virginia Code § 48-1. Investigation of Complaint by Special Grand Jury: “When complaint is made to the Circuit Court of any county, or the Corporation Court of any city of this Commonwealth, by five or more citizens of any county, city or town, setting forth the existence of a public or common nuisance, the court, or the judge therefore in vacation, shall summons a special grand jury, in the mode provided by law, to the next term of such court, to specially investigate such complaint.”

• Virginia Code § 1-200. The Common Law: “The common law of England, insofar as it is not repugnant to the principles of the Bill of Rights and Constitution of this Commonwealth, shall continue in full force within the same, and be the rule of decision, except as altered by the General Assembly.”

• Virginia Code § 1-201. Acts of Parliament: “The right and benefit of all writs, remedial and judicial, given by any statute or act of Parliament, made in aid of the common law prior to the fourth year of the reign of James the First, of a general nature, not local to England, shall still be saved, insofar as the same are consistent with the Bill of Rights and Constitution of this Commonwealth and the acts of Assembly.”

Constitutional Provisions

• U.S. Const. Art. VI, Cl. 2 (Supremacy Clause):

Petitioner(s) respectfully pray that a writ of certiorari issue to review the judgments below.

Opinions Below

1. Fourth Circuit Case No. 24-1269 (Unpublished): In Dibelardino v. Miyares, No. 24-1269, the Fourth Circuit upheld the Eastern District of Virginia's dismissal of the petitioner’s claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court found no reversible error in dismissing allegations against multiple individuals and officials, including the Virginia Attorney General, involving systemic constitutional violations, fraud upon the court, and fraud upon the public.

2. Fourth Circuit Case No. 24-1843 (Unpublished): In Re Dibelardino, No. 24-1843, the Fourth Circuit denied the petitioner’s writ of mandamus, which sought to compel Virginia and federal authorities to permit evidence presentment to grand juries to address alleged judicial misconduct by the Virginia Circuit Court, including the ongoing cover-up of the Rolin Hill homicide.

Jurisdiction and Timing

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decided the 24-1269 and 24-1843 cases on October 24, 2024. Our Supreme Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1254(1), authorizing review of cases from federal appellate courts. This petition raises critical federal questions about due process, grand jury independence, and the constitutional role of sheriffs.

As affirmed in Printz v. United States (1997), sheriffs hold unique constitutional authority as our highest law enforcement officers, underscoring their role in protecting citizens’ rights and ensuring accountability, including mechanisms like non-government citizen grand jury oversight.

The historic November 5, 2024, election confirmed that America is ready for change. At this pivotal moment, our Court has an opportunity to align with the people’s will, restoring integrity, fairness, and the foundational principles of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Constitutional & Statutory Provisions Involved

1. Fifth Amendment: "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury..."

2. Fourteenth Amendment: "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

3. Supremacy Clause: "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."

4. Relevant Statutes:

   • 42 U.S.C. § 1983: Provides a remedy for deprivation of constitutional rights by individuals acting under the color of state law.

   • 28 U.S.C. § 1254(1): Grants the Supreme Court jurisdiction to review cases from federal appellate courts by writ of certiorari.

Opening Statement

This petition is brought pro se, recognizing that members of the legal profession, bound by bar membership, face inherent conflicts within the system that sustains them, making it unreasonable to expect them to “bite the hand that feeds them.”

Given that all courts are composed of bar members or former bar members, this petition highlights a judicial system that appears fundamentally captured. Denying this petition or perpetuating the undue and unaccountable authority of the bar over We the People would constitute an eternal miscarriage of justice. In light of these circumstances, our Court is respectfully reminded to extend pro se grace and consideration as a safeguard for fairness.

The eternal question—“Did the chicken precede the egg, or the egg the chicken?”—remains a timeless paradox. Yet, the answer lies beyond human logic, rooted in God’s divine order. Similarly, the question “Who watches the watchmen?” finds its answer in We the People, whose authority derives from God and whose oversight is enshrined in our Constitution(s). These questions remind us that ultimate accountability transcends human systems, demanding that all power align with divine and constitutional principles.

“Original intent,” a foundational judicial principle codified in our Constitution, affirms that our state’s primary obligation is to yield to its citizens. This principle establishes the supremacy of individual freedoms over the interests of our state, permanently grounding governance in service to the people.

Justice for all to the nations is upon us. Our paths chosen by free will; our destiny created by God. Each soul endowed with life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness—principles enshrined in our Constitution and entrusted to those in power to safeguard. Yet, when systemic abuses vitiate the people’s consent, lawful recourse becomes imperative. As the Declaration of Independence declares, “It is the right of the people to alter or abolish it.”

Our Court stands at a defining crossroads. Will our grand jury system—an enduring cornerstone of democracy and liberty—be restored to its rightful role as a safeguard against tyranny, or will it remain captured by the very forces it was designed to counteract?

What we do—or fail to do—in this life echoes through eternity. Let this moment reaffirm the timeless truths of justice, liberty, and our inalienable rights as We The People.

Statement of the Case

This case exemplifies systemic failures within judicial and law enforcement structures, reflecting a national crisis of accountability that impacts fundamental rights.

1. Lawfare Against President Trump and Associates: For over eight years, President Trump and his associates have faced persistent lawfare, using legal processes as tools of political retribution. This has eroded public confidence in our systems, highlighting systemic misuse of legal authority. Will this pattern persist?

2. The Ongoing Rolin Hill Homicide Cover-Up: As detailed on JusticeForRolin.org, the Virginia Beach jail is notorious for its deadly reputation, with 19 deaths reported over seven years. The tragic case of Rolin Hill, an African-American Eagle Scout, exemplifies these systemic abuses. Arrested for minor trespassing, Hill was brutally beaten and wrapped in pallet shrink wrap by five deputy sheriffs, with the incident captured on 62 cameras. Initially dismissed as a “medical emergency,” his death was revealed as a homicide only after public pressure four months later. Despite this revelation, critical details remain concealed, no charges have been filed, and the Virginia State Police is implicated in the cover-up.

   Allegations of jail rape rings further expose a pervasive culture of concealment. This underscores the urgent need for citizen-led oversight to restore justice and accountability.

3. Documented Evidence of Grand Jury Manipulation: The 24-1843 filing and related documents reveal prima facie evidence of grand jury manipulation in Virginia Beach. This undermines justice and violates the constitutional role of our grand jury as a "protector of citizens against arbitrary and oppressive governmental actions," stripping away a crucial safeguard of fairness in our systems.

4. Documented RICO Activity Among Judicial and Law Enforcement Officials: The 24-1269 filing and related documents present prima facie evidence of RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) violations involving Virginia Beach local, Virginia state, and federal officials. This pattern of collusion by aligned unlawful interests, fraud upon our courts and the public by our courts, and misconduct exposes a system where those sworn to uphold our laws instead protect entrenched interests, denying citizens due process and equal protection.

5. Evidence of 11/5/2024 Election Interference: The 11/6/2024 Virginia Beach Circuit Court CL24-5834 filing details how network media management blocked a respected reporter from covering emerging information about Rolin Hill’s case and jail abuses. This raises critical questions: What did reelection-bound officials and Republican Party leaders know before the election? Despite 62 cameras recording the incident, Hill's death being ruled a homicide, and five deputies being fired, the investigation remains unresolved with no charges filed. Why?

6. Petitioner’s Lawful Efforts to Seek Redress Have Been Met with Documented Excessive Force, Injury, False Arrests, False Imprisonments, and Ongoing Lawfare: Multiple notices were sent to all Virginia legislators, the governor, and key committee chairs, all met with silence and inaction.

These incidents, as exemplified by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Nos. 24-1269 and 1843 October 24, 2024 rulings, reveal a widespread breakdown in judicial integrity and underscore the urgent need for citizen-led grand jury oversight. Empowering citizens through our sheriff’s authority and duty to oversee these critical processes is essential to restore due process, secure these rights, and ensure accountability at all levels of government. Our Court's intervention is critical to address issues that threaten the integrity of our systems nationwide.

Reasons for Granting the Petition

1. Constitutional Significance of Grand Jury Integrity: The grand jury, as envisioned by the framers, serves as a critical check against government overreach, anchored in the Fifth Amendment's due process protections. Justice Scalia, in United States v. Williams (1992), affirmed that our grand jury acts as a safeguard for citizens against “arbitrary and oppressive governmental action.” The Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution ensures that this fundamental right remains protected against encroachments by any state or local authority. Today, the need to restore the integrity of our grand jury to secure these rights has never been more pressing.

2. Societal Impact and Accountability Crisis: The Constitution and our historical precedents guarantee that our grand jury protects citizens' rights and holds our government accountable. The erosion of this right undermines the foundational promise of justice in our society. Virginia codes affirm the authority and role of citizens and sheriffs in upholding rule-of-law principles, reinforcing the necessity for non-governmental oversight. By restoring citizen-led grand jury integrity, our Court has the opportunity to reaffirm its commitment to our rights enshrined in our governing documents.

3. Historical and National Urgency: This petition raises issues fundamental to American democracy. When our traditional avenues for public recourse—the soapbox, ballot box, jury box, and cartridge box—are compromised, our sheriff’s authority remains a lawful, peaceful, and expedient pathway for securing justice through public accountability. As affirmed in Virginia Code § 48.1, citizen involvement in grand jury proceedings is essential to preserving democratic principles and ensuring transparency.

4. Consistency with Precedent & Constitutional Mandates: The Supreme Court has consistently upheld protections inherent in the First, Fifth, Tenth, and Fourteenth Amendments, aligning with the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution to ensure that federal principles take precedence over conflicting local or state practices. This petition provides our Court with an opportunity to reaffirm these principles, ensuring that due process and equal justice remain accessible to every citizen while reinforcing the foundational role of our grand jury in securing accountability.