(1) In this case the defendant factual guilt of Forcible Rape and
Kidnapping has never been established in any fashion permitted by the Due
Process Clause of the 14th Amendment: because under a void judgment a guilty
plea cannot be sustained, and because it cannot be harmless error, wholly
to deny a defendant a jury trial and allow a guilty plea to be entered solely
on the consent of the Trial Judge, Prosecutor and the defendant's attorney,
when the defendant did not expressly admit in open court that he intended
to rape the 22 year old woman without her consent and by force and that he
removed her without consent, and because a guilty plea cannot be sustained
that the government obtained by arbitrary acts of torture. Thereof, does
Jr. Weeks have a Federal Due Process Clause Right to be provided a corrective
Judicial Process for the relief before the State Court or before this Court
since the State Court has deprived petitioner of his liberty without due
process of law.

(2) Since the Court in Weeks v. State, 140 S.W.3d 39, 42-50 (MO. banc
2004) found that It. Weeks did not personally describe the events that found
the basis of the charge Id at 42-43, found the Prosecutor received the SEMO
Lab reports that eliminated It. Weeks as the rapist Id at 42-43, at 47, and
found the prosecutor used C.R. Longwell who was not trained or certified
in DNA testing to analyze the DNA samples and mislead the Courts about the
rapist did not ejaculate Id at 50; and direct It. Weeks to file a State Habeas
Corpus Ibtion to challenge the alleged Brady v. Maryland , violations. (A)
was it plain error for the state court to not issue the writ of habeas corpus,
hold the evidentiary hearing; explore the Brady violation, and explore chain
of custody of evidence samples to be tested and remove the Prosecutor from
being in control of the New DNA procedure, and allowed petitioner his own
DNA Analyst free of the State's influences to perform a DNA analysis of the
DNA evidence in question? (B) Was It. Weeks Due Process Rights violated under
such arbitrary Government actions?

(3) If the United States Constitution must govern the case against the
American Citizen to imprison him or her and the State falsely imprisons the
person under a void Judgment for lack of subject matter Jurisdiction and
(Acts) in a manner inconsistent with the Due Process Clause of the 5th, 6th
and 14th Amendment. Is (A) Respondent's Commitment Order null and void? And
is (C) Does this Court have original Jurisdiction in a case not authorized
by the Constitution, to restore freedom to Petitioner? Pursuant to Henderson
v. Morgan . 426 U.S. 645 at 2253 —2257 (1976), and Daniels v. Williams 474
U.S. 327, 331 (1986) and Fay v Noia . 372 U.S. 391, 423 (1963).

(4) Can the State of Missouri imprison petitioner without a valid
indictment or valid felony information presentation, deny him the fundamental
due process of law rights and torture him for 30 years under a void judgment,
(A) Can the state claim a legal interest in

Due-process,forcible-rape,kidnapping,brady-violation,dna-evidence,void-judgment