Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

JUSTIA.COM SURGICALLY REMOVED “MINOR v HAPPERSETT” FROM 25 SUPREME COURT OPINIONS
Natural Born Citizen ^ | 10-20-2011 | Leo Donofrio

Posted on 10/20/2011 12:00:20 PM PDT by Danae

New evidence conclusively establishes that 25 U.S. Supreme Court opinions were sabotaged then republished at Justia.com during the run up to the ’08 election. My prior report documented the scrubbing of just two cases. But last week, a third sabotaged case was discovered which led to a thorough examination of all US Supreme Court cases which cite “Minor v. Happersett” as they appeared on Justia.com between 2006 and the present.

Since Justia placed affirmations on each tampered opinion which state “Full Text of Case”, personnel may also be guilty of violating 18 U.S.C. 1018 by intentionally passing off tampered versions of US Supreme Court opinions as if they were official versions published by the US Supreme Court.

+++SNIP+++

Regardless of who you supported in 2008, or whether you agree with the assertion of Minor’s relevance, every American should be outraged that 25 Supreme Court cases were surgically sabotaged and then passed off to the public as if the tampered versions contained the “Full Text of Case”.

+++SNIP+++

... Justia’s reaction to my last report mirrored the deception of the sabotage. Instead of addressing the proof, Justia quietly and with stealth un-scrubbed the evidence without acknowledging or addressing the issue at all. And they placed “.txt robots” on their URL’s for the two previously identified cases so the Wayback Machine could no longer provide historical snapshots of those cases as published at Justia.

TWO LAYERS OF SABOTAGE

In all 25 instances of tampering, the case name “Minor v. Happersett” was removed from Justia’s publication of each SCOTUS opinion which cited to it. Anyone searching for cases citing Minor at Justia or Google were led into a maze of confusion. In some instances, not only was the case name scrubbed, the numerical citation was also removed along with whole sentences of text.


TOPICS: Government; History; Politics
KEYWORDS: collusion; eligibility; happersett; justia; minor; minorhappersett; naturborncitizen; obama; precedence; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-108 next last
FAR FAR FAR more at the link. Including a GREAT MANY screenshots.

Spread this far and wide FReepers. This smoking gun is so hot that the bullet is literally still in the air!!!

1 posted on 10/20/2011 12:00:30 PM PDT by Danae
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Ron; little jeremiah; MestaMachine; STARWISE; rxsid; butterdezillion; Fred Nerks; ...
Ping to the list.

Admin Mod, please consider moving this to Breaking News. This is an original investigative report even though it has initially been posted at a blog.

2 posted on 10/20/2011 12:02:53 PM PDT by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sneakers

bttt


3 posted on 10/20/2011 12:09:59 PM PDT by sneakers (EAT YOUR PEAS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Danae

Is Justia.com some type of federal government agency that intentionally manipulated court documents?

If so, who ever in the government ordered that documents be manipulated is in big trouble.

However, if Justia.com is a private organization, there really is nothing that you can do.


4 posted on 10/20/2011 12:12:22 PM PDT by trumandogz (In Rick Perry's Nanny State, the state will drive your kids to the dentist at tax payer expense)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

Read the story my friend. Justia.com is run by Tim Stanley - a HUGE advocate for free legal information on the internet. His site surgically scrubbed references to Minor, text of Minor, and citations TO Minor in 25 separate SCOTUS Opinions, while posting that it was the “Full text of the case”. That is fraud my brother.


5 posted on 10/20/2011 12:15:34 PM PDT by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Danae

It appears the Ministry of Truth has been busy!


6 posted on 10/20/2011 12:18:34 PM PDT by Panzerlied ("We shall never surrender!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Danae
Thanks Danae!!

The evil powers and doers that we're up against almost seem insurmountable sometimes...scary times we're living in.

7 posted on 10/20/2011 12:18:56 PM PDT by Las Vegas Ron (Rush Limbaugh = the Beethoven of talk radio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Danae

Well then you may want to write Tim an email and ask him to refund your money.


8 posted on 10/20/2011 12:19:23 PM PDT by trumandogz (In Rick Perry's Nanny State, the state will drive your kids to the dentist at tax payer expense)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Ron

Keep praying. The evil we are up against is “legion” and we need the power of God to prevail.


9 posted on 10/20/2011 12:21:00 PM PDT by Josephat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Danae

Good job Danae, watch your “six.” You may receive a visit from NSA and if you do, cry it far and wide and lawyer up immediately.


10 posted on 10/20/2011 12:24:15 PM PDT by Candor7 (Obama fascist info..http://www.americanthinker.com/2.009/05/barack_obama_the_quintessentia_1.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

Yeah, I will get right on that.

So, just how do you feel about “Victimless” crime? Don’t answer. Its pretty obvious already you could not care less about fraud.


11 posted on 10/20/2011 12:24:16 PM PDT by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Danae

If you believe it is a crime, then you should call 911 and report the crime.


12 posted on 10/20/2011 12:27:31 PM PDT by trumandogz (In Rick Perry's Nanny State, the state will drive your kids to the dentist at tax payer expense)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Danae

Interesting. If there was never any doubt that Obama was a natural-born citizen, then why the cover-up at Justia? Someone must have been very worried that people would read that opinion and decide that Obama’s status was in doubt, if they took such drastic steps.


13 posted on 10/20/2011 12:28:29 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: basil

Ping for later reading...........


14 posted on 10/20/2011 12:29:28 PM PDT by basil (It's time to rid the country of "gun free zones" aka "Killing Fields")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Danae

This type of “correction” is a consequence of the computer age. 1984 made real if you please! Any material deemed “incorrect” can easily be erased.


15 posted on 10/20/2011 12:30:48 PM PDT by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz; Danae
Do you think Leo Donofrio is grasping at straws when he asserts:
Justia ...personnel may also be guilty of violating 18 U.S.C. 1018 ??

I will hang up and read your response.

16 posted on 10/20/2011 12:38:55 PM PDT by frog in a pot (Their bible calls for either our conversion or our death - how and when has that changed ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz
Apparently Leo's legal theory is that since this is public domain material, it falls under a law that says
Whoever, being a public officer or other person authorized by any law of the United States to make or give a certificate or other writing, knowingly makes and delivers as true such a certificate or writing, containing any statement which he knows to be false, in a case where the punishment thereof is not elsewhere expressly provided by law, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
Be careful what you say, citizen. Misquoting old court cases can lead to PRISON!
17 posted on 10/20/2011 12:39:54 PM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("More weight!"--Giles Corey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Danae

sfl


18 posted on 10/20/2011 12:40:23 PM PDT by phockthis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bubba Ho-Tep

Well, then call 911.


19 posted on 10/20/2011 12:46:13 PM PDT by trumandogz (In Rick Perry's Nanny State, the state will drive your kids to the dentist at tax payer expense)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: frog in a pot

Last I heard from Leo, he had black helicopters flying over his house and was being chased by men in yellow suits.


20 posted on 10/20/2011 12:48:53 PM PDT by trumandogz (In Rick Perry's Nanny State, the state will drive your kids to the dentist at tax payer expense)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz
Are you acting like a jerk? Or do you just play one on the Internet?

Maybe YOU don't consider erasing history and through that act electing an Illegal POTUS whilst conservatives consider electing ANOTHER ONE in Marco Rubio, but some of us DO.

We actually VALUE the Constitution and Supreme Court Law and Decisions which make it REAL in our society.

21 posted on 10/20/2011 12:50:06 PM PDT by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Danae

Interesting Justia altering/scrubbing references to a Transcript of a Supreme Court case that defines a Natural Born Citizen to be two citizen parents and birth on US soil.


22 posted on 10/20/2011 1:00:16 PM PDT by Red_Devil 232 (VietVet - USMC All Ready On The Right? All Ready On The Left? All Ready On The Firing Line!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bubba Ho-Tep
You forgot to add include this paragraph:

"The statute covers a “person” authorized by any law of the US to make or give official writings. Justia.com is authorized – according to the federal Public Domain laws – to re-publish US Supreme Court opinions. In every case that was tampered, the words “Full Text of Case” appear on each scrubbed opinion. Since the cases were intentionally sabotaged by the removal of text, the affirmation at the top of each page which indicated that one is reading the “Full Text of Case” is knowingly false. It’s the inclusion of this intentionally false statement which makes this a crime under the statute."

23 posted on 10/20/2011 1:08:45 PM PDT by Red_Devil 232 (VietVet - USMC All Ready On The Right? All Ready On The Left? All Ready On The Firing Line!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS

True enough. However, this goes against Tim Stanleys personal philosophy, one that has made him TENS of millions of dollars.

Its fully documented. Its disgusting.


24 posted on 10/20/2011 1:14:02 PM PDT by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Danae
Florida TV newsrooms are covering the "birthers turn their sights on Marco Rubio" story. Perhaps in a parallel to the scrubbing of these cases, tv 9 Orlando closed with the statement (not an exact quote) "birthers say because his parents were not yet citizens, Marco is not a natural born citizen, but legal experts say Rubio is an American Citizen." A true statement but non-responsive. Note how this report, like every report I've heard or seen, leaves out the "natural born" from the ending clause. Now why is that, he asked rhetorically? Until there is a determination on exactly what "natural born": means with respect to the Constitutional qualification for the Office of POTUS, the controversy will remain. It is as simple as that.
25 posted on 10/20/2011 1:16:21 PM PDT by NonValueAdded (So much stress was put on Bush's Fault that it finally let go, magnitude 6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

Yellow Polo shirts, and you OBVIOUSLY haven’t been in touch with him lately. That was in 2008 the day before the election. Almost 3 years ago.


26 posted on 10/20/2011 1:17:34 PM PDT by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Candor7

As I stated in the article, this information went to Accuracy In Media, and two different sources at the Washington Times.

One does what one can. The truth is that important.

Besides, I park the car in the garage... ;)


27 posted on 10/20/2011 1:20:54 PM PDT by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Danae

Are the black helicopters still flying above Leo’s house?


28 posted on 10/20/2011 1:21:19 PM PDT by trumandogz (In Rick Perry's Nanny State, the state will drive your kids to the dentist at tax payer expense)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded

Send this article to the Station.

Rubio IS a citizen, but there is a legal distinction between Citizen and Natural Born Citizen, and it was cemented into law by the Supreme Court in 1875, Minor v. Happersett.

It is time for the truth to become public knowledge.


29 posted on 10/20/2011 1:23:03 PM PDT by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: frog in a pot
You forgot to say that you're a long time listener, first time caller and that you've got an observation, a question, a comment and a rebuttal. ;-)

Apropos of nothing as my brother is want to say I'd read that only property holders were originally allowed to vote and tracking down and reading this scrubbed case there is a good summary of voting requirements after the adoption of our Constitution. So what does it say you ask? I'll post it and then hang up and listen to your response ... ;-)


When the Federal Constitution was adopted, all the States, with the exception of Rhode Island and Connecticut, had constitutions of their own. These two continued to act under their charters from the Crown. Upon an examination of those constitutions we find that in no State were all citizens permitted to vote. Each State determined for itself who should have that power. Thus, in New Hampshire, 'every male inhabitant of each town and parish with town privileges, and places unincorporated in the State, of twenty-one years of age and upwards, excepting paupers and persons excused from paying taxes at their own request,' were its voters; in Massachusetts 'every male inhabitant of twenty-one years of age and upwards, having a freehold estate within the commonwealth of the annual income of three pounds, or any estate of the value of sixty pounds;' in Rhode Island 'such as are admitted free of the company and society' of the colony; in Connecticut such persons as had 'maturity in years, quiet and peaceable behavior, a civil conversation, and forty shillings freehold or forty pounds personal estate,' if so certified by the selectmen; in New York 'every male inhabitant of full age who shall have personally resided within one of the counties of the State for six months immediately preceding the day of election . . . if during the time aforesaid he shall have been a freeholder, possessing a freehold of the value of twenty pounds within the county, or have rented a tenement therein of the yearly value of forty shillings, and been rated and actually paid taxes to the State;' in New Jersey 'all inhabitants . . . of full age who are worth fifty pounds, proclamation-money, clear estate in the same, and have resided in the county in which they claim a vote for twelve months immediately preceding the election;' in Pennsylvania 'every freeman of the age of twenty-one years, having resided in the State two years next before the election, and within that time paid a State or county tax which shall have been assessed at least six months before the election;' in Delaware and Virginia 'as exercised by law at present;' in Maryland 'all freemen above twenty-one years of age having a freehold of fifty acres of land in the county in which they offer to vote and residing therein, and all freemen having property in the State above the value of thirty pounds current money, and having resided in the county in which they offer to vote one whole year next preceding the election;' in North Carolina, for senators, 'all freemen of the age of twenty-one years who have been inhabitants of any one county within the State twelve months immediately preceding the day of election, and possessed of a freehold within the same county of fifty acres of land for six months next before and at the day of election,' and for members of the house of commons 'all freemen of the age of twenty-one years who have been inhabitants in any one county within the State twelve months immediately preceding the day of any election, and shall have paid public taxes;' in South Carolina 'every free white man of the age of twenty-one years, being a citizen of the State and having resided therein two years previous to the day of election, and who hath a freehold of fifty acres of land, or a town lot of which he hath been legally seized and possessed at least six months before such election, or (not having such freehold or town lot), hath been a resident within the election district in which he offers to give his vote six months before said election, and hath paid a tax the preceding year of three shillings sterling towards the support of the government;' and in Georgia such 'citizens and inhabitants of the State as shall have attained to the age of twenty-one years, and shall have paid tax for the year next preceding the election, and shall have resided six months within the county.'
Source: http://openjurist.org/88/us/162/minor-v-happersett
30 posted on 10/20/2011 1:23:43 PM PDT by Tunehead54 (Nothing funny here ;-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Red_Devil 232
You forgot to add include this paragraph:

I didn't forget. I posted the law that Leo is citing, not his interpretation. Do you agree that something being in the public domain means that everyone on the Planet Earth is now "a person authorized by any law of the United States to make or give a certificate or other writing" of that thing?

31 posted on 10/20/2011 1:25:13 PM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("More weight!"--Giles Corey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

You tell me smarta$$.


32 posted on 10/20/2011 1:26:52 PM PDT by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]




Support Free Republic
Click Here to Donate

33 posted on 10/20/2011 1:32:21 PM PDT by TheOldLady (FReepmail me to get ON or OFF the ZOT LIGHTNING ping list)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Danae

And there it is.

Congratulations, Danae. :)


34 posted on 10/20/2011 1:35:29 PM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife ("Real solidarity means coming together for the common good."-Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Danae

I have no idea if the black helicopters are still flying over Leo’s house as I have been engrossed with the pteradactyles that Joe Farah believes are flying over his head and wondering how Jerome Corsi is doing with his hunt for Bigfoot.


35 posted on 10/20/2011 1:38:10 PM PDT by trumandogz (In Rick Perry's Nanny State, the state will drive your kids to the dentist at tax payer expense)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

You should be seeing a doctor is what you should be doing.


36 posted on 10/20/2011 1:42:06 PM PDT by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife

Thanks! I can sincerely say, I need a nap.

LOL


37 posted on 10/20/2011 1:43:00 PM PDT by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Danae

Thanks for the ping, Danae. I’ve been waiting to see what this was all about.

Have you freepmailed any mods??? Try JR. This should not be relegated to blogs.

And WHO got this Justia guy to scrub these references? I doubt he thought it up all by his lonesome. (I haven’t read Donofrio’s whole article yet, maybe it says.)


38 posted on 10/20/2011 2:05:36 PM PDT by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

I pinged a Mod at post 2. Also I posted my own article on it in Breaking News, they took it off. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2795647/posts?page=38

Sigh.


39 posted on 10/20/2011 2:09:23 PM PDT by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Danae
Maybe YOU don't consider erasing history and through that act electing an Illegal POTUS whilst conservatives consider electing ANOTHER ONE in Marco Rubio, but some of us DO.

We just don't care about some third rate website. This isn't Lexis or West. Who cares.

40 posted on 10/20/2011 2:12:37 PM PDT by Publius Valerius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Danae
Since Justia placed affirmations on each tampered opinion which state “Full Text of Case”, personnel may also be guilty of violating 18 U.S.C. 1018 by intentionally passing off tampered versions of US Supreme Court opinions as if they were official versions published by the US Supreme Court.

Wrong. 18 U.S.C. 1018 provides that:

Whoever, being a public officer or other person authorized by any law of the United States to make or give a certificate or other writing, knowingly makes and delivers as true such a certificate or writing, containing any statement which he knows to be false, in a case where the punishment thereof is not elsewhere expressly provided by law, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

Justia.com is neither a "public official" nor an "other person authorized by any law of the United States to make or give a certificate or other writing," so 18 U.S.C. 1018 does not affect them.

41 posted on 10/20/2011 2:14:00 PM PDT by Conscience of a Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Publius Valerius

You don’t get it do you?

Most people do NOT have subscriptions to Lexis or West. Or any of the other heavy search sites. So people depend on what comes up on Google or Yahoo or Bing first!

Google a legal case and BET that Justia.com will come up at the top. What do you think most people are going to do when doing research? Pay and subscribe or hit the free site?

EXACTLY.

They hit the free site, and that free site Tampered with cases so that they COULD NOT be found on searching for them!

HELLO! How can you not see the significance of that?? Really??


42 posted on 10/20/2011 2:20:00 PM PDT by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Danae

At last your article is on “news” even not breaking.

Sigh.


43 posted on 10/20/2011 2:23:08 PM PDT by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Danae

My team did it. We were paid $500/scrub.

You’re welcome.


44 posted on 10/20/2011 2:26:20 PM PDT by Mr Rogers ("they found themselves made strangers in their own country")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Danae

So federal criminal laws should govern the content of material published by private individuals not under contract with a government agency? Wow. Should they government be doing this in the name of freedom?


45 posted on 10/20/2011 2:38:34 PM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

O.o

Really.

Given that this is a federal crime... you might want to crawl back under your rock.

PS: at 500$ a scrub... just to suggest something like that is abhorrent to me. But then with a lack of substance you do regularly resort to insulting statements.


46 posted on 10/20/2011 2:48:52 PM PDT by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Danae

Seems a lot of people don’t like your article.

Means the content really disturbs them.

Good.


47 posted on 10/20/2011 2:51:00 PM PDT by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah; Danae
Thank you, danae!

(Varmints have arrived, per usual.. ;)




48 posted on 10/20/2011 2:54:24 PM PDT by STARWISE (The overlords are in place .. we are a nation under siege .. pray, go Galt & hunker down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Conscience of a Conservative

If he could understand the law, he wouldn’t be a birther. You’re pissing into a very deep well of ignorance...


49 posted on 10/20/2011 2:55:48 PM PDT by Mr Rogers ("they found themselves made strangers in their own country")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Lucky

Publishing “Full text of case” when publishing SCOTUS cases menas you are publishing the FULL text of the case. If you state that on material that you have deliberately REMOVED text from, and altered in other ways....

Yes, there should be and in fact IS legal penalty for doing things like this.

There is also a push in the Government Printing Office for Digital Authentications of Governmet Documents, and that includes SCOTUS cases which are the Law of the land.


50 posted on 10/20/2011 3:00:08 PM PDT by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-108 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson