Castle Doctrine 'against an intruder in their home"

I hold a valid title and deed to my home and property, and those trespassing DO NOT.

The Court has indicated a lack of jurisdiction which has been affirmed by the Superior Court and denied Reconsideration, thus removing the courts from any involvement regarding the issue of possession.

The decisions and documents prevent any judicial intervention to my regaining possession of the property. Where the court lacks jurisdiction to decide possession, they also lack jurisdiction to prevent me from regaining possession.

Their decision is incorrect and/or the fraud and forgery of the Central Legal Staff. In the effort, they deny constitutionally protected rights - availability of the court for redress of grievances - and interfere with the administration of the courts while preventing and obstructing Pennsylvania law.
Rule 1.6 Injustice - no protection of the law. No constitutional rights.
No prosecution of the staff has yet occured in response to my criminal complaint to the US DOJ, two counties, two state and one other federal investigating agency.

Where the court negligence has deliberately prevented an Action in Ejectment which is proper when the Plaintiff does not have possession. A Quiet Title is only permitted to be filed by the person in possession. Well the one's with the INVALID DEED are not likely to do that. I must regain possession and quiet the title from the multiple fraudulent filings and forgeries by Genuine Title.

I have written to the Governor, the state Attorney General and the Montgomery County Sheriff requesting their assistance in regaining possession of the property. The Executive Branch of Government enforces the law.

The question remains if the 'secret orders' from unidentified courts will prevent the attorney general from her responsibilities - a broad pre-emptory SECRET overreach and violation of the separation of powers determined to prevent my rights and the law. (Rule 1.6 Corruption)

The Castle Doctrine ...

The Castle Doctrine assumes that an “attacker” or “intruder” intends great bodily harm if he/she either: 1. unlawfully and forcefully enters a dwelling, residence or occupied vehicle, or 2. is attempting to unlawfully and forcefully remove someone from a dwelling, residence or occupied vehicle Either of these circumstances results in an initial presumption that a person (who is aware that 1. or 2. above have occurred) is justified in using deadly force in self defense against the “attacker” or “intruder.” NOTE: This rule does NOT APPLY if ANY of the following apply: • the “attacker” or “intruder” is another resident or has a right to be in the dwelling, residence or occupied vehicle; • the “attacker” or “intruder” is a parent, grandparent or other guardian removing a child from the dwelling, residence or occupied vehicle; • the “attacker” or “intruder” is actually a law enforcement officer engaged in the performance of his duties; OR • the “attack” or “intrusion” is related to criminal activity in the dwelling, residence or occupied vehicle (e.g., an “attacker” breaks into a home to steal drugs from a drug dealer).

Some state self defense laws include provisions that address duty to retreat from an intruder in one’s home or from an attacker in other places.

The common law principle of “castle doctrine” says that individuals have the right to use reasonable force, including deadly force, to protect themselves against an intruder in their home. This principle has been codified and expanded by state legislatures.

Florida’s law states “a person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.”



Laws in at least 22 states allow that there is no duty to retreat an attacker in any place in which one is lawfully present. (Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and West Virginia.)

At least nine of those states include language stating one may “stand his or her ground.” (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and South Carolina.)

Pennsylvania's law, amended in 2011, distinguishes use of deadly force outside one’s home or vehicle. It provides that in such locations one cannot use deadly force unless he has reasonable belief of imminent death or injury, and either he or she cannot retreat in safety or the attacker displays or uses a lethal weapon.

Self defense laws in at least 22 states (Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee West Virginia and Wisconsin) provide civil immunity under certain self defense circumstances.

Statutes in at least six states (Hawaii, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, North Dakota and Tennessee) assert that civil remedies are unaffected by criminal provisions of self defense law.