The purpose of this booklet is to
revive, as Jefferson put it, "The Ancient Principles."
It is not designed to promote lawlessness or a return to the
jungle. The "Ancient Principles" refer to the Ten
Commandments and the Common Law. The Common Law is, in simple
terms, just plain common sense and has its roots in the Ten
Commandments.
In 1776 we came out of BONDAGE
with FAITH, UNDERSTANDING and COURAGE. Even against great odds,
and with much bloodshed, we battled our way to achieve LIBERTY.
LIBERTY is that delicate balance between the force of government
and FREEWILL of man. LIBERTY brings FREEDOM of choice to work, to
trade, to go and live where one wishes; it leads to ABUNDANCE.
ABUNDANCE, if made an end to itself, will result in COMPLACENCY
which leads to APATHY. APATHY is the "let George do it"
philosophy. This always brings DEPENDENCY. For a period of time,
dependents are often not aware they are dependent. They delude
themselves by thinking that they are still free -- "We never
had it so good." -- "We can still vote, can't we?"
Eventually abundance diminishes and DEPENDENCY becomes known by
its true nature: BONDAGE!!!
There
are few ways out of bondage. Bloodshed and war often result, but
our founding fathers learned of a better way. Realizing that a
CREATOR is always above and greater than that which He creates,
they established a three vote system by which an informed
citizenry can control those acting in the name of the government.
To be a good master you must always remember the true "pecking
order" or chain of command in this nation:
1. GOD created man . . .
2. Man (that's you) created the
Constitution . . .
3. Constitution created
government . . .
4. Government created
corporations . . etc.
The base of power was to remain
in WE THE PEOPLE but unfortunately, it was lost to those leaders
acting in the name of the government, such as politicians,
bureaucrats, judges, lawyers, etc.
As a result America began to
function like a democracy instead of a REPUBLIC. A democracy is
dangerous because it is a one-vote system as opposed to a
Republic, which is a three-vote system: Three votes to check
tyranny, not just one. American citizens have not been informed of
their other two votes.
Our first vote is at the polls on
election day when we pick those who are to represent us in the
seats of government. But what can be done if those elected
officials just don't perform as promised or expected? Well, the
second two votes are the most effective means by which the common
people of any nation on earth have even had in controlling those
appointed to serve them in government.
The second vote comes when you
serve on a Grand Jury. Before anyone can be brought to trial for a
capital or infamous crime by those acting in the name of the
government, permission must be obtained from people serving on the
Grand Jury! The Minneapolis Star and Tribune in March 27, 1987,
edition noted a purpose of the grand Jury in this way:
"A Grand
Jury's purpose is to protect the public from an overzealous
prosecutor."
The third is the most powerful
vote: this is when you are acting as a jury member during a
courtroom trial. At this point, "the buck stops" with
you! It is in this setting that each JUROR has MORE POWER than the
President, all of Congress, and all of the judges combined!
Congress can legislate (make law), the President or some other
bureaucrat can make an order or issue regulations, and judges may
instruct or make a decision, but no JUROR can ever be punished for
voting "Not Guilty!" Any juror can, with impunity,
choose to disregard the instructions of any judge or attorney in
rendering his vote. If only one JUROR should vote "Not Guilty"
for any reason, there is no conviction and no punishment at the
end of the trial. Thus, those acting in the name of government
must come before the common man to get permission to enforce law.
YOU ARE ABOVE THE
LAW!
As a JUROR in a trial setting,
when it comes to your individual vote of innocent or guilty, you
are truly answerable to GOD ALMIGHTY. The First Amendment to the
Constitution was born out of this great concept. However, judges
of today refuse to inform JURORS of their RIGHTS. The Minneapolis
Star and Tribune in a news paper article appearing in its November
30, 1984 edition, entitled: "What Judges Don't Tell Juries"
stated:
"At the time of adoption of
the Constitution, the jury's role as a defense against political
oppression was unquestioned in American jurisprudence. This nation
survived until the 1850's, when prosecutions under the Fugitive
Slave Act were largely unsuccessful because juries refused to
convict"
"Then judges began to erode
the institution of free juries, leading to the absurd compromise
that is the current state of the law. While our courts uniformly
state juries have the power to return a verdict of not guilty
whatever the facts, they routinely tell jurors the opposite."
"Further, the courts will
not allow the defendants or their counsel to inform the jurors of
their true power. A lawyer who made . . . Hamilton's argument
would face professional discipline and charges of contempt of
court."
"By what logic should juries
have the power to acquit a defendant but no right to know about
that power? The court decisions that have suppressed the notion of
jury nullification cannot resolve this paradox."
"More than logic has
suffered. As originally conceived, juries were to be made a safety
valve way to soften the bureaucratic rigidity of the judicial
system by introducing the common sense of the community. If they
are to function effectively as the `conscience of the community,'
jurors must be told that they have the power and the right to say
no to a prosecution in order to achieve a greater good. To cut
jurors off from this information is to undermine one of our most
important institutions."
"Perhaps the community
should educate itself. Then citizens called for jury duty could
teach the judges a needed lesson in civics."
This booklet is designed to bring
to your attention one important way our nation's founders provided
to insure that you, (not the growing army of politicians, judges,
lawyers, and bureaucrats) rule this nation. it will focus on the
rule of power you possess as a JUROR, how you got it, why you have
it, and remind you of the basis on which you must decide not only
the facts placed in evidence but also the validity or
applicability of every law, rule, regulation, ordinance, or
instruction given by any man seated as a judge or attorney when
you serve as a JUROR.
One JUROR can stop tyranny with a
"NOT GUILTILY VOTE!" He can nullify bad law in any case,
by "HANGING THE JURY!"
"I am only one, but I am
one. I cannot do everything, but I can do something. What I can
do, I should do and, with the help of God, I will do!"
-Everett Hale
The only power the judge has over
the JURY is their ignorance!
JURY RIGHTS
"The jury has the right to
judge both the law as well as the fact in controversy." -John
Jay, 1st Chief Justice U.S. supreme Court, 1789
"The jury has the right to
determine both the law and the facts."
-Samuel Chase, U.S. supreme Court Justice, 1796, Signer of the
unanimous Declaration
"The jury has the power to
bring a verdict in the teeth of both law and fact."
-Oliver Wendell Holmes, U.S. supreme Court Justice, 1902
"The law itself is on trial
quite as much as the cause which is to be decided."
-Harlan F. Stone, 12th Chief Justice U.S. supreme Court, 1941
"The pages of history shine
on instances of the jury's exercise of its prerogative to
disregard instructions of the judge..."
-U.S. vs. Dougherty, 473 F 2nd 1113, 1139. (1972)
LAW OF THE LAND
The general misconception is that
any statute passed by legislators bearing bearing the appearance
of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is
the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be
in agreement. It is impossible for a law which violates the
Constitution to be valid. This is succinctly stated as follows:
"All laws which are
repugnant to the Constitution are null and void."
Marbury vs. Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803)
"When rights secured by the
Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or
legislation which would abrogate them.
" Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436 p. 491.
"An unconstitutional act is
not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; affords no
protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as
inoperative as though it had never been passed."
Norton vs. Shelby County 118 US 425 p. 442 "
The general rule is that an
unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law,
is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any
purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its
enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so
branding it.
"No one is bound to obey an
unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it."
16 Am Jur 2nd, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256
A SUMMARY OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS
The TEN COMMANDMENTS represent
GOD'S GOVERNMENT OVER MAN! GOD commands us for our own good to
give up wrongs and not rights! HIS system always results in
LIBERTY and FREEDOM! The Constitution and the Bill of Rights are
built on this foundation, which provides for punitive justice. It
is not until one damages another persons property that he can be
punished. The Marxist system leads to bondage and GOD'S system
leads to LIBERTY! Read very carefully:
1. Thou shalt have no other gods
before Me.
2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image.
3. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.
4. Remember the Sabbath to keep it Holy.
5. Honor thy father and thy mother.
6. Thou shalt not murder.
7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
8. Thou shalt not steal.
9. Thou shalt not bear false witness.
10. Thou shalt not covet.
Directly above the Chief
Justice's chair is a tablet signifying the TEN COMMANDMENTS. When
the Speaker of the House in the U.S. Congress looks up, his eyes
look into the face of Moses.
"The Bible is the Book upon
which this Republic rests."
-Andrew Jackson, Seventh President of the United States
"The moral principles and
precepts contained in the Scriptures ought to form the basis of
all our civil constitutions and laws. All the miseries and evils
which men suffer from vice, crime, ambition, injustice,
oppression, slavery, and war, proceed from their despising or
neglecting the precepts of the Bible."
-Noah Webster
A SUMMARY OF THE
COMMUNIST MANIFESTO
The Communist Manifesto
represents a misguided philosophy, which teaches the citizens to
give up their RIGHTS for the sake of the "common good,"
but it always ends in a police state. This is called preventive
justice. Control is the key concept. Read carefully:
1. Abolition of private property.
2. Heavy progressive income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights on inheritance.
4. Confiscation of property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Central bank.
6. Government control of Communications & Transportation.
7. Government ownership of factories and agriculture.
8. Government control of labor.
9. Corporate farms, regional planning.
10. Government control of education.
GIVE UP RIGHTS
FOR THE "COMMON GOOD"?
Where people fear
the government you have tyranny; where the government fears the
people, you have liberty.
Politicians, bureaucrats and
especially judges would have you believe that too much freedom
will result in chaos. Therefore, we should gladly give up some of
our RIGHTS for the good of the community. In other words, people
acting in the name of the government, say we need _more laws_ and
more JURORS to enforce these laws -- even if we have to give up
some RIGHTS in the process. They believe the more laws we have,
the more control, thus a better society. This theory may sound
good on paper, and apparently many of our leaders think this way,
as evidenced by the thousands of new laws that are added to the
books each year in this country. But, no matter how cleverly this
Marxist argument is made, the hard fact is that whenever you give
up a RIGHT you lose a "FREE CHOICE"!
This adds another control.
Control's real name is BONDAGE! The logical conclusion would be,
if giving up some RIGHTS produces a better society, then by giving
up all RIGHTS we could produce a perfect society. We could chain
everybody to a tree, for lack of TRUST. This may prevent crime,
but it would destroy PRIVACY, which is the heartbeat of FREEDOM!
It would also destroy TRUST which is the foundation for DIGNITY.
Rather than giving up RIGHTS, we should be giving up wrongs! The
opposite of control is not chaos. More laws do not make less
criminals! We must give up wrongs, not rights, for a better
society! William Pitt of the British House of Commons once
proclaimed,
"Necessity is the plea for
every infringement of human liberty; it is the argument of
tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
INALIENABLE,
[UNALIENABLE] OR NATURAL RIGHTS!
NATURAL RIGHTS ARE THOSE RIGHTS
such as life (from conception), LIBERTY and the PURSUIT OF
HAPPINESS eg. FREEDOM of RELIGION, SPEECH, LEARNING, TRAVEL,
SELF-DEFENSE, ETC. Hence laws and statutes which violate NATURAL
RIGHTS, though they may have the color of law, are not law but
impostors! The U.S. Constitution was written to protect these
NATURAL RIGHTS from being tampered with by legislators. * Further,
our forefathers also wisely knew that the U.S. Constitution would
be utterly worthless to restrain government legislators unless it
was clearly understood that the people had the right to compel the
government to keep within the Constitutional limits.
In a jury trial
the real judges are the JURORS! Surprisingly, judges are actually
just referees bound by the Constitution!
*Lysander Spooner wrote as
follows:
"Government is established for the protection of the weak
against the strong. This is the principal, if not the sole motive
for the establishment of all legitimate government. It is only the
weaker party that loses their liberties, when a government becomes
oppressive. The stronger party, in all governments are free by
virtue of their superior strength. They never oppress themselves.
Legislation is the work of the stronger party; and if, in addition
to the sole power of legislation, they have the sole power of
determining what legislation shall be enforced, they have all
power in their hands, and the weaker party are the subjects of an
absolute government. Unless the weaker party have veto, they have
no power whatever in the government . . . no liberties . . . The
trial by jury is the only institution that gives the weaker party
any veto upon the power of the stronger. Consequently it is the
only institution that gives them any effective voice in the
government, or any guaranty against oppression.
ESSAY on the TRIAL by Jury
JURY TAMPERING?
A JURY's Rights, Powers and
Duties:
The Charge to the JURY in the
First JURY Trial before the supreme* Court of the U.S. Illustrates
the TRUE POWER OF THE JURY. In the February term of 1794, the
supreme Court conducted a JURY trial and said ". . . it is
presumed, that the juries are the best judges of facts; it is, on
the other hand, presumed that the courts are the best judges of
law. But still both objects are within our power of decision."
"You have a right to take
upon yourselves to judge of both, and to determine the law as well
as the fact in controversy."
-(State of Georgia vs. Brailsford, et al, 3 Dall. 1)
"The JURY has an
unreviewable and unreversible power . . . to acquit in disregard
of the instructions on the law given by the trial judge . . ."
(emphasis added)
-U.S. vs. Dougherty, 473 F 2nd 1113, 1139 (1972)
Hence, JURY disregard of the
limited and generally conviction-oriented evidence presented for
its consideration, and JURY disregard for what the trial judge
wants them to believe is the controlling law in particular case
(sometimes referred to as "JURY lawlessness")* is not
something to be scrupulously avoided, but rather encouraged.
Witness the following quotation from the eminent legal authority
above-mentioned:
"Jury lawlessness is the
greatest corrective of law in its actual administration. The will
of the state at large imposed on a reluctant community, the will
of a majority imposed on a vigorous and determined minority, find
the same obstacle in the local JURY that formerly confronted kings
and ministers." (emphasis added) (Dougherty cited above, note
32 at 1130)
*Supreme is not capitalized in
the Constitution, however Behavior is.
*Jury lawlessness means
willingness to nullify bad law.
The Right of the
JURY to be Told of Its Power
Almost every JURY in the land is
falsely instructed by the judge when it is told it must accept as
the law that which is given to them by the court, and that the
JURY can decide only the facts of the case. This is to destroy the
purpose of a Common Law JURY, and to permit the imposition of
tyranny upon a people.
"There is nothing more
terrifying than ignorance in action."
-Goethe (engraved on a plaque at the Naval War College)
"To embarrass justice by a
multiplicity of laws, or to hazard it by confidence in judges, are
the opposite rocks on which all civil instructions have been
wrecked."
-Johnson (engraved in Minnesota State Capitol Outside the Supreme
Court Chambers)
". . . The letter killeth,
but the spirit giveth life." -II Corinthians 3:6
"It is error alone which
needs the support of government. truth can stand by itself."
-Thomas Jefferson
The JURY'S options are by no
means limited to the choices presented to it in the courtroom. "The
jury gets its understanding as to the arrangements in the legal
system from more than one voice. There is the formal communication
from the `judge.' There is informal communication from the total
culture -- literature; current comment, conversation; and, of
course, history and tradition." (Dougherty cited above, at
1135)
LAWS, FACTS AND
EVIDENCE!
Without the power to decide what
facts, law and evidence are applicable, JURIES cannot be a
protection to the accused. If people acting in the name of
government are permitted by JURORS to dictate any law whatever,
they can also unfairly dictate what evidence is admissible or
inadmissible and thereby prevent the WHOLE TRUTH from being
considered. Thus if government can manipulate and control both the
law and the evidence, the issue of fact becomes virtually
irrelevant. In reality, true JUSTICE would be denied leaving us
with a trial by government and not a trial by JURY!
HOW DOES TYRANNY
BEGIN?
WHY ARE THERE SO MANY LAWS?
Heroes are men of glory who are
so honored because of some heroic deed. People often out of
gratitude yield allegiance to them. Honor and allegiance are nice
words for power! Power and allegiance can only be held rightfully
by trust as a result of continued character.
When people acting in the name of
government violate ethics, they break trust with "WE THE
PEOPLE." The natural result is for "WE THE PEOPLE"
to pull back power (honor and allegiance).
The loss of power creates fear
for those losing the power. Fearing loss of power, people acting
in the name of government often seek to regain or at least hold
their power. Hence, to legitimize their quest for control, laws
and force are often instituted.
Unchecked power is the
foundation of tyranny. It is the JUROR'S duty to use the JURY ROOM
as a vehicle to stem the tide of oppression and tyranny: To
prevent bloodshed by peacefully removing power from those who have
abused it. The JURY is the primary vehicle for peaceful
restoration of LIBERTY, POWER AND HONOR TO "WE THE PEOPLE!"
YOUR VOTE COUNTS!
Your vote of NOT Guilty must be
respected by all members of the JURY -- it is the RIGHT and DUTY
of a JUROR to Never, Never, Never yield his or her sacred vote --
for you are not there as a fool, merely to agree with the
majority, but as an officer of the court and a qualified judge in
your own right. Regardless of the pressures or abuse that may be
heaped on you by any other members of the JURY with whom you may
be in good conscience to disagree, you can await the reading of
the verdict secure in the knowledge you have voted your own
conscience and convictions -- and not those of someone else.
YOU ARE NOT A
RUBBER STAMP!
By what logic do we send our
youth to battle tyranny on foreign soil, while we refuse to do so
in our courts? Did you know that many of the planks of the "Communist
Manifesto" are now represented by law in the U.S.? How is it
possible for Americans to denounce communism and practice it
simultaneously.
The JURY judges the Spirit,
Motive and Intent of both law and the Accused, whereas the
prosecutor only represents the letter of the law.
Therein lies the opportunity for
the accomplishment of "LIBERTY and JUSTICE for ALL." If
you, and numerous other JURORS throughout the State and nation
begin and continue to bring in verdicts of NOT GUILTY in such
cases where man-made statute is defective or oppressive, these
statutes will become as ineffective as if they had never been
written.
"If we love wealth better
than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the
animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not
your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which
feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity
forget that ye were our countrymen."
-Samuel Adams
SEC. II GIVE ME
LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH!
PATRICK HENRY SHOCKED!
Young Christian attorney Patrick
Henry saw why a JURY of PEERS is so vital to FREEDOM! It was March
1775 when he rode into the small town of Culpeper, Va. he was
totally shocked by what he saw! There, in the middle of the town
square was a minister tied to a whipping post, his back laid bare
and bloody with the bones of his ribs showing. He had been
scourged like JESUS, with whips laced with metal.
Patrick henry is quoted as
saying: "When they stopped beating him, I could see the bones
of his rib cage. I turned to someone and asked what the man had
done to deserve a beating such as this."
SCOURGED FOR NOT
TAKING A LICENSE!
The reply given him was that the
man being scourged was a minister who refused to take a license.
He was one of twelve who were locked in jail because they refused
to take a license. A license often becomes an arbitrary control by
the government that makes a crime out of what ordinarily would not
be a crime. IT TURNS A RIGHT INTO A PRIVILEGE!
Three days later they scourged him to death.
This was the incident which
sparked Christian attorney Patrick Henry to write the famous words
which later would become the rallying cry of the Revolution. "What
is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear,
or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and
slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others
may take, but as for me, GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH!"
Later he made this part of his famous speech at St. John's
Episcopal Church in Williamsburg, Va.
JURY OF PEERS
Our forefathers felt that in
order to have JUSTICE, it is obvious that a JURY of "PEERS"
must be people who actually know the defendant. How else would
they be able to judge motive and intent?
"PEERS" of the
defendant, like RIGHTS of the JURY have also been severely
tarnished. Originally, it meant people of "equals in station
and rank," (Black's 1910), "free-holders of a
neighborhood," (Bouvier's 1886), or "A companion; a
fellow; an associate. (Webster's 1828).
WHO HAS THE RIGHT
TO SIT ON A JURY?
Patrick Henry, along with others,
was deeply concerned as to who has a right to sit on a JURY.
Listen to our forefathers wisdom on the subject of "PEERS.
" MR. HENRY "
By the bill of rights of England,
a subject has a right to a trial by his peers. What is meant by
peers? Those who reside near him, his neighbors, and who are well
acquainted with his character and situation in life." Patrick
Henry (Elliot, "The Debates in Several State Conventions on
the Adoption of the Federal Constitution, 3:579)
Patrick Henry also knew that
originally the JURY of PEERS was designed as a protection for
Neighbors from outside governmental oppression. Henry states the
following, "Why do we love this trial by jury? Because it
prevents that hand of oppression from cutting you off . . . This
gives me comfort -- that, as long as I have existence, my
neighbors will protect me." (Elliot, 3:545, 546).
MR. HOLMES
Mr. Holmes, from Massachusetts,
argued strenuously that for JUSTICE to prevail, the case must be
heard in the vicinity where the fact was committed by a JURY of
PEERS. " . . . a jury of peers would, from their local
situation, have an opportunity to form a judgement of the
CHARACTER of the person charged with the crime, and also to judge
of the CREDIBILITY of the witnesses." (Elliot, 2:110).
The people are
masters of both Congress and courts, not to overthrow the
Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it!
-Abraham Lincoln
MR. WILSON
Mr. Wilson, signer of "The
unanimous Declaration," who also later became a supreme Court
Justice, stressed the importance of the JURORS knowing personally
both the defendant and the witnesses. "Where jurors can be
acquainted with the characters of the parties and the witnesses --
where the whole cause can be brought within their knowledge and
view -- I know no mode of investigation equal to that by a trial
by jury: they hear every thing that is alleged; they not only hear
the words, but they see and mark the features of the countenance;
they can judge of weight due to such testimony; and moreover, it
is a cheap and expeditious manner of distributing justice. There
is another advantage annexed to the trial by jury; the jurors may
indeed return a mistaken or ill-founded verdict' but their errors
cannot be systematical." (Elliot, 2:516)
FREEDOM FOR
WILLIAM PENN
"Those people who are not
governed by GOD will be ruled by tyrants." -William Penn
Edward Bushnell and three fellow JURORS learned this lesson well.
They refused to bow to the court. They believed in the absolute
power of the JURY, though their eight companions cowered to the
court. The four JURORS spent nine weeks of torture in prison,
often without food and water, soaked with urine, smeared with
feces, barely able to stand, and even threatened with fines, yet
they would not give in to the judge. Edward Bushnell said, "My
liberty is not for sale," though he had great wealth and
commanded an international shipping enterprise. These "bumble
heads", so the court thought, proved the power of the people
was stronger than any power of government. They emerged total
victors.
THE FIRST
AMENDMENT
The year was 1670, and the case
Bushnell sat on was that of William Penn, who was on trial for
violation of a "Conventicle Act." This was an elaborate
Act which made the Church of England the only legal church. The
Act was struck down by their not guilty vote. Freedom of Religion
was established and became part of the English Bill of Rights and
later it became the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In
addition, the Right to peaceful assembly was founded, Freedom of
Speech, and also habeas corpus. The first such writ of habeas
corpus ever issued by the Court of Common Pleas was issued to free
Edward Bushnell. Later this trial gave birth to the concept of
Freedom of the press.
Had Bushnell and his colleagues
yielded to the guilty verdict sought by the judge and prosecutor,
William Penn most likely would have been executed as he clearly
broke the law.
HE BROKE THE LAW!
There would have been no Liberty
Bell, no Independence Hall, no city of Philadelphia, and no state
called Pennsylvania, for young William Penn, founder of
Pennsylvania, and leader of the Quakers, was on trial for his
life. His alleged crime was preaching and teaching a different
view of the Bible than that of the Church of England. This appears
innocent today, but then, one could be executed for such actions.
He believed in freedom of religion, freedom of speech and the
right to peaceful assembly. He had broken to government's law, but
he had injured no one. The four heroic JURORS knew that only when
actual injury to someone's person or property take place is there
a real crime. No law is broken when no injury can be shown. Thus
there can be no loss or termination of rights unless actual damage
is proven. Many imposter laws were repealed as a result of this.
IT IS ALMOST
UNFAIR!
The trial made such an impact the
every colony but one established the jury as the first liberty to
maintain all other liberties. It was felt that the liberties of
people could never be wholly lost as long as the jury remained
strong and independent, and that unjust laws and statutes could
not stand when confronted by conscientious JURORS. JURORS today
face an avalanche of imposter laws. JURORS not only still have the
power and the RIGHT, but also the DUTY, to nullify bad laws by
voting "not guilty." At first glance it appears that it
is almost unfair, the power JURORS have over government, but
necessary when considering the historical track record of
oppression that governments have wielded over private citizens.
JEFFERSON'S
WARNINGS!
In 1789 Thomas Jefferson warned
that the judiciary if given too much power might ruin our
REPUBLIC, and destroy our RIGHTS!
"The new Constitution has
secured these [individual rights] in the Executive and legislative
departments: but not in the Judiciary. It should have established
trials by the people themselves, that is to say, by jury."
The Judiciary of the United
States is the subtle corps of sappers and miners constantly
working under ground to undermine the foundations of our
confederated fabric." (1820) "
. . . the Federal Judiciary; an
irresponsible body (for impeachment is scarcely a scarecrow),
working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little to-day
and a little to-morrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a
thief, over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall be usurped
from the States, and the government of all be consolidated into
one. .
. . when all government . . . in
little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the
centre of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided
of one government on another and will become as venal and
oppressive as the government from which we separated. (1821)
"The opinion which gives to
the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional and
what are not, not only for themselves in their own sphere of
action, but for the legislative and executive also in their
spheres, would make the judiciary a despotic branch. "
. . . judges should be withdrawn
from the bench whose erroneous biases are leading us to
dissolution. It may, indeed, injure them in fame or fortune; but
it saves the Republic. .."
Due to the size of this document
we (TRV) broke the following into three parts:
Unanimous
Declaration
YOUR TURN!
You -- as a juror -- armed
merely with the knowledge of what a COMMON LAW JURY really is and
what your common law rights, powers and duties really are, can do
more to re-establish "liberty and justice for all" in
this State and ultimately throughout all of the United States than
all out Senators and Representatives put together. Why? Because
even without the concurrence of any of your fellow jurors in a
criminal trial, you, with your single vote of "NOT GUILTY"
can nullify every rule or "law" that is not in
accordance with the principles of natural, God-given, Common, or
Constitutional Law. It is precisely this power of nullification
that makes the trial by JURY one of our most important RIGHTS. It
can protect and preserve all of the citizen's other RIGHTS.
The
Constitution
The
Bill of Rights
PROCLAIM LIBERTY!
Inscribed on our hallowed LIBERTY BELL are these words "PROCLAIM
LIBERTY THROUGHOUT ALL THE LAND UNTO ALL THE INHABITANTS THEREOF."
-Lev. XXV X "
Government is not reason; it is
not eloquence; it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant
and a fearful master."
-George Washington "
Woe to those who decree unjust
statutes and to those who continually record unjust decisions, to
deprive the needy of justice, and to rob the poor of My people of
their rights..."
-Isaiah 10:1,2 |
