Wednesday, October 19, 2005

Irwin Schiff Trial Coverage by Freedom Law School (Segment 4)

posted by David Jahn @ 10/19/2005 11:20:00 PM  

4 Old Comments:

The chief enemies of republican freedom are mental sloth,
conformity, bigotry, superstition, credulity, monopoly in the market
of ideas, and utter, benighted ignorance. Adderley v. State of
Florida, 385 U.S. 39, 49 (1967) Decision by Justice Black. GD

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/19/2005 11:37 PM  

To all, I had 3 kids paper every car in the Norwalk parking structure which is 7 stories tall. It was done meticulously and completed in less than 10 minutes. Total of over 1000 pamphlets.

Tim

THE RIGHT OF THE JURY TO BE TOLD OF ITS POWER
Every jury in the country has the right to bring in a verdict based on, not whether the defendant's act or omission was merely contrary to a dictionary interpretation of the words or phrases used in some man-made statute recited to it by the trial "judge", but whether or not the defendant's act or omission was truly blameworthy according to the jury's (and representatively, the community's) natural sense of morality and justice. It is a well- established principle in criminal jurisprudence that an act or omission does not make a man guilty unless he does so by intention.
The right of the jury to disregard either the law (as laid down by the trial "judge") or the facts (as permitted by the same trial "judge" to be placed into evidence) is referred to in legal terminology as the jury's prerogative of nullification (jury lawlessness) which means in ordinary language that where the jurors cannot in conscience impose blame, they cannot in conscience allow punishment.
The prerogative of nullification (jury lawlessness) is not only legitimate, but a praiseworthy right of the jury as well. Prerogative nullification is a mechanism that permits the jury as spokesman for the community's conscience to disregard the strict requirements of man-made law, as well as the "judge's" instructions to the jury where it finds those requirements cannot justly be applied in a particular case. Today in the courts this unassailable doctrine is concealed from the jury and is effectively condemned by the "judge" in the presence of the jury.

JURY POWER in the system of checks and balances:
In a Constitutional system of justice, such as ours, there is a judicial body with more power than Congress, the President, or even the Supreme Court. Yes, the trial jury protected under our Constitution has more power than all these government officials. This is because it has the final veto power over all "acts of the legislature" that may come to be called "laws".
That is the power of the jury at work; the power to decide the issues of law under which the defendant is charged, as well as the facts. In our system of checks and balances, the jury is our final check, the people's last safeguard against unjust law and tyranny.

A Jury's Rights, Powers, and Duties:
But does the jury's power to veto bad laws exist under our Constitution?
It certainly does! At the time the Constitution was written, the definition of the term "jury" referred to a group of citizens empowered to judge both the law and the evidence in the case before it. Then, in the February term of 1794, the Supreme Court conducted a jury trial in the case of the State of Georgia vs. Brailsford (3 Dall 1). The instructions to the jury in the first jury trial before the Supreme Court of the United States illustrate the true power of the jury. Chief Justice John Jay said: "It is presumed, that juries are the best judges of facts; it is, on the other hand, presumed that courts are the best judges of law. But still both objects are within your power of decision." (emphasis added) "...you have a right to take it upon yourselves to judge of both, and to determine the law as well as the fact in controversy".
So you see, in an American courtroom there are in a sense twelve judges in attendance, not just one. And they are there with the power to review the "law" as well as the "facts"! Actually, the "judge" is there to conduct the proceedings in an orderly fashion and maintain the safety of all parties involved.

Go to the internet and check for yourselves, there are many, just type juries into a search engine on a computer.
http://www.jurorsrule.com/
http://www.ccguide.org.uk/jury.html

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/19/2005 11:43 PM  

CCPR/C/81/Add.4
24 August 1994

Original: ENGLISH

Initial reports of States parties due in 1993 : United States of America. 24/08/94.
CCPR/C/81/Add.4. (State Party Report)

Convention Abbreviation: CCPR
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE

CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS SUBMITTED BY STATES PARTIES
UNDER ARTICLE 40 OF THE COVENANT

Initial reports of States parties due in 1993

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Article 1 - Self-determination


9. The basic principle of self-determination is at the core of American political life, as the nation was born in a struggle against the colonial regime of the British during the eighteenth century. The right to self-determination, set forth in article 1 of the Covenant, is reflected in Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution, which obliges the federal government to guar-an-tee to every State a "Republican Form of Government".

Hence, the people of the United States are free in law and in practice to determine their "political status"


The Insular Areas

12. The United States includes a number of Insular Areas, each of which is unique and constitutes an integral part of the U.S. political family. Persons born in these areas are U.S. citizens
**********************************

Now you know what a U.S. Citizen is and where they come from.

Are you a U.S. Citizen? YES if you have made that claim you self determined your political status and elected, voluntarily so, to be treated as such!

How's the treatment? CJ

Above the stars is from the U.N. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/20/2005 12:18 AM  

- The Term U.S.citizen also known as a United States Citizen does not appear in the Constitution of any one of the 50 States of the American Union.

-The Term U.S.citizen also known as a United States Citizen does not appear in the Constitution for the United States of America.

-The Term U.S.citizen also known as a United States Citizen does not appear in Constitution of the United States of America.

QUIZ -

1. Who is the individual that is a U.S.citizen also known as United States Citizen at birth?

2. Who alone determines the political status and civil rights of these U.S.Citizens also known as United States Citizens?

***********************************

NATIONAL/STATE CITIZENSHIP IS SUPERIOR TO U.S. CITIZENSHIP/STATE RESIDENT STATUS; and Title 8 USC sec, 1101(a)(22) (original text), “All Americans are nationals of the United States, with the United States citizen-subject class being a minor category within the universal category “national of the United States.”; and “Citizenship of the United States does not entitle a citizen to privileges and immunities of Citizens of state, since privileges and immunities of one are not the same as the other.” – Tashiro vs Jordan, 256 P 545; and “Both before and after the 14th Amendment … it has not been necessary for a person to be a citizen of the [federal] United States in order to be a Citizen of his [Union] state, [and] Under our complex system of government, there may be a Citizen of a [Union] state, who is not a citizen of the [federal] United States in the full sense of the term…” – Cross vs. Board of Supervisors of Elections, 221 A.2d 431

Answers
1. see previous post
2. congress

CJ

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/20/2005 12:46 AM