Eternal Vigilance!

I ran across, & participated in, an interesting conversation at WolfMoon’s Q TreeHouse on the Jury system in America.  There is some great historical info within…so I’m sharing it here.  Please take the time to read through & add your thoughts in the comments below if you’d like to expand the conversation.

See the source image

See the source image

Here is where you can find the beginning of this conversation:

https://wqth.wordpress.com/2020/08/11/dear-kag-20200811-open-thread/comment-page-1/#comment-569672

See the source image

See the source image

    1. It basically means the media gets to shape the jury pool, to the point where to find an untainted juror you have to find people with barely enough brains to fog a mirror.

      Unfortunately, there’s probably Supreme Court precedent going back decades on this.

      Liked by you and 14 other people

        1. FIRST you need to HAVE JURIES!!!!

          “The primary function of the independent juror, is not as many think, to dispense punishment to fellow citizens accused of breaking various laws, but rather to protect fellow citizens from tyrannical abuses of power by the government!” — Merry Colin

          “Anyone accused of a crime in this country is entitled to a jury trial.”

          The Constitution may say so but, in fact, this is simply not the case — and becoming less so as politicians fiddle with legal definitions and sentencing standards in order specifically to reduce the number of persons entitled to a trial….

          ….As Thomas Jefferson put it to Tom Paine in a 1789 letter, “I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution.” ….
          *http://prorev.com/juries.htm

          Thomas Jefferson also wrote in letters:

          “You seem . . . to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so . . . and their power [is] the more dangerous, as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots.” (Letter to William Jarvis, Sept. 28, 1820)

          “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. They are construing our constitution from a co-ordination of a general and special government to a general and supreme one alone. This will lay all things at their feet, and they are too well versed in English law to forget the maxim, ‘boni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem’ [good judges have ample jurisdiction]. . . . A judiciary independent of a king or executive alone, is a good thing; but independence of the will of the nation is a solecism, at least in a republican government.” (Letter to Thomas Ritchie, Dec. 25, 1820)

          Maybe this is the REAL REASON Thomas Jefferson is attacked and being tossed on the dung heap by the left.

          Liked by you and 1 other person

          1. This is absolutely awesome!!! Thank you so much for sharing this!!!

            On a completely separate note, Angelle Staria/at the Gates of War wanted me to let you know how much he appreciates your prayers & the words of encouragement that I copied to him the other day…God Bless!

            See the source image

            Like

        2. AND then there is CASE LAW.

          If a Liberal Judge or Judge and jury go outside the actual laws to find a person guilty then it becomes enshrined in CASE LAW and that Judge or Judge and jury have enacted NEW LAWS without going through the normal process. (Think Lawfare)

          In the 1870s, Dean Christopher Columbus Langdell transformed American legal education by introducing what has become the standard first-year curriculum for American law schools – including classes in contracts, property, torts, criminal law, and civil procedure.
          •Langdell also developed the case method of teaching law, which became the dominant pedagogical model at U.S. law schools. His notion that law could be studied as a “science” gave university legal education a reason for being that was distinct from vocational preparation. Critics at first defended the old lecture method because it was faster and cheaper and made fewer demands on faculty and students. But advocates said the case method had a sounder theoretical basis in scientific research and the inductive method.
          *https://hls.harvard.edu/about/history/

          Our current ‘system’ is a bastardization of our CONSTITUTIONAL system! The Constitution, itself, is written in Common law. (That is a quote from Antonin Scalia.) Our Ruling Oligarchs have systematically sidelined common law and replaced it with ‘Equity law,’ the corrupt legal and judicial system that we have today.

          Liked by you and 4 other people

        3. More stolen from Black Beauty :
          April 25, 2018 at 12:56 am

          …a U Penn website where you can download the article as a pdf:
          https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3957&context=penn_law_review
          Title of the article:
          HOW EQUITY CONQUERED COMMON LAW — Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in Historical Perspective

          This is definitely a turgid law journal article and it requires a lot of concentration for us laymen. I had to read it several times to make full sense of it. HOWEVER: You can easily see, even while skimming the article, how the Progressives used the very same arguments to attack the common law that they use, now, to attack the Constitution: “The common law is antiquated and it’s no longer relevant to our society.” ” The common law is too complex. It needs to be streamlined.” I marvel that they have gotten away with destroying institution after institution using the same hackneyed lies! Lastly, the footnotes in this article are a treasure trove of truths that basically catch the evil doers of each era red-handed, destroying the key features of our system. Among those, the common law is the most valuable, and its main institution, the common law grand jury was the most valuable tool to help keep the republic, as Franklin exhorted us to do.

          The common law grand jury gave the jurors absolute hegemony over the judge and the prosecutor. No request that they made–not for evidence or further investigation, or to examine evidence personally, or to hear witnesses questioned again–could be refused. The decision of the common law grand jury was final.
          Partly because I read this article, I came to the conclusion that the Founders intended for the common law grand jury to be the tool that made the People the fourth branch of government. They gave the people omnipotence, via the common law grand jury, so that they could nip corruption in the bud, as it first began to form, in local arenas. This is the key to the keeping of our republic. As we Drain the Swamp, we need to keep in mind that we must also restore the apparatus by which we can prevent the corruption spreading, again. I hope you guys give sufficient credence to what I am saying, here. I see this whole concept as being of central importance….

          Liked by you and 3 other people

    2. What I’d like to see happen is: get rid of voir dire (beyond ensuring the juror doesn’t know the defendant, victim, either counsel, any other juror, or any of the witnesses) as it’s just an avenue for jury stacking.

      If you MUST keep voir dire, reform it so it focuses not on finding someone who knows nothing at all about the case, but rather someone who is capable of putting aside what he thinks he knows when faced with contradictory evidence in court.

      Liked by you and 14 other people

        1. Grand jury?

          I’d love to see some sort of mechanism where the accused gets to present exculpatory information right there, to avoid prosecutors who are prosecuting as a means of political grandstanding or intimidation.

          Liked by you and 2 other people

        1. For those not familiar, any party (including the judges) may enter the courtarena with bias — but not prejudgment. Jorj X. McKie, a legum during the Dosadi case, demonstrated that one of the judges on the panel had prejudged the case…..and speared him before the ruling was issued.

          One feature of the courtarena is that none of the participants is guaranteed to survive the experience — litigants, counsel, judges, officers of the court, or spectators are required to properly play their respective roles and can find themselves abruptly and unexpectedly under question.

          Liked by you and 4 other people

    3. The entire concept of a jury pool is that like-minded, common-sense individuals could evaluate what is known and come to a fair disposition. Instead, we have all these rules of evidence to see which attorney can best bamboozle the jury through strategic selection of withheld information.

      Liked by you and 13 other people

    4. Yhe Oligarcy running this country worked long and har to get RID OF JURY TRIALS

      Note on Jury trials in the USA.
      The 6th and 11th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article 3 Section 2 give US citizens the right to a trial. However as Joan Biskupic stated

      “Anyone accused of a crime in this country is entitled to a jury trial.”

      The Constitution may say so but, in fact, this is simply not the case — and becoming less so as politicians fiddle with legal definitions and sentencing standards in order specifically to reduce the number of persons entitled to a trial….

      SEE:
      http://www.copblock.org/29691/what-is-jury-nullification/

      Here is how the politicians have gotten around the US Constitution to make sure citizens are denied their right to a trial:

      The Seventh Amendment, passed by the First Congress without debate, cured the omission by declaring that the right to a jury trial shall be preserved in common-law cases… The Supreme Court has, however, arrived at a more limited interpretation. It applies the amendment’s guarantee to the kinds of cases that “existed under the English common law when the amendment was adopted,” …

      The right to trial by jury is not constitutionally guaranteed in certain classes of civil cases that are concededly “suits at common law,” particularly when “public” or governmental rights are at issue and if one cannot find eighteenth-century precedent for jury participation in those cases. Atlas Roofing Co. v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Commission (1977). Thus, Congress can lodge personal and property claims against the United States in non-Article III courts with no jury component. In addition, where practice as it existed in 1791 “provides no clear answer,” the rule is that “[o]nly those incidents which are regarded as fundamental, as inherent in and of the essence of the system of trial by jury, are placed beyond the reach of the legislature.” Markman v. Westview Instruments (1996). In those situations, too, the Seventh Amendment does not restrain congressional choice.

      In contrast to the near-universal support for the civil jury trial in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, modern jurists consider civil jury trial neither “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty,” Palko v. State of Connecticut (1937), nor “fundamental to the American scheme of justice,” Duncan v. Louisiana (1968).
      http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/amendments/7/essays/159/right-to-jury-in-civil-cases

      Liked by you and 3 other people

    5. Last comment on the DESTRUCTION of our Constitution and system of law.

      Dr. Harrison Schmitt (former US Senator (NM), astronaut, geologist, #12 man on the Moon) put it very bluntly

      It is now obvious that Congress got America into a real pickle when it agreed in 1933, as part of Roosevelt’s New Deal, to delegate law-making power to agencies under the control of the President. This unconstitutional and increasingly threatening situation became entrenched with the passage of the 1946 Administrative Procedures Act. APA set up the formal mechanisms for creating regulatory law outside any direct action by Congress.
      http://americasuncommonsense.com/blog/2011/02/01/regulation-and-the-constitution-1/

      That is why I put FDR ahead of the rest as the most EVIL President.

      >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
      The transfer of power from the people and states to the federal government includes the granting of legislative power to the executive branch. This includes not only bureaucrats like the EPA and FDA making ‘Regulations’ with the same clout as a Congressional law but Executive Orders. (The Supreme Court ruled this was OK if there was a Federal Register where citizens could comment on the regulations. Ever seen anything about that RIGHT in any high school class??? Also did the over 5000 HELL NO’s! and very few YES! comments on the Federal Register stop the bureaucrats from giving us Animal ID anyway???

      Now bureaucratic departments have a ‘within house Judicial Tribunal’ that replaces the trial by jury, as well as complex ‘regulations’ no one can understand. Any question as to WHY farmers and businesses get fined millions of dollars that go DIRECTLY to THAT DEPARTMENT? In this way the Supreme Court intentionally trashed the Constitution and Amendment VII.

      “In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved….” ~ Amendment VII

      Pretty darn clear isn’t it? But As I showed in a different comment the Supreme Court didn’t think so.
      ….

      Right to Jury in Civil Cases
      *https://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/amendments/7/essays/159/right-to-jury-in-civil-cases

      Toward the end of the Constitutional Convention, Hugh Williamson of North Carolina noted that “no provision was yet made for juries in civil cases and suggested the necessity of it.”

      There has recently been some attempt to put lipstick on the regulation pig:

      Cornell has the actual law
      5 U.S. Code Chapter 8 – CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW OF AGENCY RULEMAKING
      *https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/part-I/chapter-8

      There is also the cost of regulations:
      *http://www.nam.org/Data-and-Reports/Cost-of-Federal-Regulations/Federal-Regulation-Full-Study.pdf

      Liked by you and 5 other people

See the source image

See the source image

See the source image

Well thanks for stopping by.  I hope this conversation kindles an interest in learning more about our nation’s founding & the profound thoughts & insights of those who bequeathed us the greatest nation on earth (warts & all).  We have a Judeo-Christian moral foundation & an English Common Law legal foundation & these foundation stones are those upon which a strong nation-state can be built.

See the source image

See the source image

See the source image

God Bless!!!

See the source image

The below quote is not from a relative, that we are aware of 😉

See the source image

See the source image

See the source image

 

See the source image

See the source image

See the source image

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s