3.      Supreme Court Rule 10(c) Supreme Court Conflict Rational

          Jimm Larry Hendren contradicted the Supreme Court ruling that limitations as a defense do not accrue from the initial act but the last for repeated actions. See Lewis v. Chicago, 08-974 (2010)

SUMMARY

Any of the three Supreme Court Rule 10 reasons above would be sufficient for aiding the appellate jurisdiction for Writ of Mandamus and this writ can’t be done by any lower Court and will require the entire Supreme Court.  This writ will absolutely be the most broadly impacting Court ruling in history and must be decided by the entire United States Supreme Court.   No other Court jurisdiction is sufficient or even close to sufficient.  No other Court that has been asked to stop the continual defamation and trafficing in Petitioner’s pornography to anonymous viewers has elected to IMMEDIATELY stop defamation as this Court may now do by exercising jurisdiction for an immediate Writ of Mandamus now plead.  Supreme Court Clerk Cynthia J Rapp Esq told the petitioner on the phone that if the petitioner had ever posted nude photos to the Internet, there was nothing the Supreme Court would do about them now being shown by search engines.  Court Clerk Cynthia J Rapp Esq reported an opinion that is contrary to numerous US Statutes and several Acts of Congress. The petitioner refuses to accept that the Supreme Court will continue to favor the free flow of pornographic wire communications to Earth’s children.