 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
That works to censor my comments of course.
General observations:
1. Rule of law is voluntary, mutual defense, association as exemplified in the concept known as federation expressed in the words of the American federal congress here:
http://teachingamericanhistory.org/ratification/elliot/vol1/approaches/
That the question was not whether, by a declaration of independence, we should make ourselves what we are not; but whether we should declare a fact which already exists:
That, as to the people or Parliament of England, we had always been independent of them, their restraints on our trade deriving efficacy from our acquiescence only, and not from any rights they possessed of imposing them; and that, so far, our connection had been federal only, and was now dissolved by the commencement of hostilities:
That, as to the king, we had been bound to him by allegiance, but that this bond was now dissolved by his assent to the late act of Parliament, by which he declares us out of his protection, and by his levying war on us a fact which had long ago proved us out of his protection, it being a certain position in law, that allegiance and protection are reciprocal, the one ceasing when the other is withdrawn:
That was a defining moment when clearly the subjects of thousands of years of despotic (criminal = involuntary = subjection to servitude = slavery) existence voice their rejection of said slavery.
Slavery was, is, and will continue to be a simple criminal act or a very complex criminal act - involving deception - whereby involuntary association is created - perpetrated - out of natural freedom in liberty. The former slaves, at that point in time and place - 1775 America - voiced their accurate account of the facts.
When a voluntary association ends is when a volunteer perpetrates the crime of aggression upon other volunteers.
That is a fundamental basis of fact, an accurate accounting, and it is not something one lone keyboard operator on the internet invented as a meme.
The link happens to be a link to the first American federal Congress records of how the decision was made to publish a Declaration of Independence.
The words offer meaning.
The Declartion of Independence offers similar meaning as the former slaves enumerate precisely which crimes of aggression were perpetrated by the former voluntary - federated - mutual defenders (The British) which constituted the end of the federal - voluntary - association.
1. Freedom in Liberty exists naturally as people volunteer to work effectively for mutual defense against all enemies (perpetrators) foreign and domestic. That is a federal - voliuntary - association working that way: voluntary association.
2. Slavery, despotism, tyranny, organized crime, fraud, extortion, torture (cruel and unusual punishment), murder, and mass murder is involuntary association by definition, as the aggressors define the meaning of crime when they perpetrate their crimes upon their victims.
3. The criminals work most effectively at organizing their crime when the criminals agree to employ effective deception.
4. The FORMER victims typically re-establish freedom in liberty through federation - voluntary association for mutual defense - ending the reign of terror with information - indictment - declaring that uncovering of that deception that works to enslave everyone including those who claim to be the masters of slaves.
So you have before you the Americn example of the announcement - to the world - of the end of The British version of tyranny over the people of America, in the words that lead to the Declaration of Independence, and then, in the words published as the first draft of the Declaration of Independence written as follows:
https://jeffersonpapers.princeton.edu/selected-documents/jefferson%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Coriginal-rough-draught%E2%80%9D-declaration-independence-0
he has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating it’s most sacred rights of life & liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. this piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers, is the warfare of the CHRISTIAN king of Great Britain. determined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce:[11] and that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, by murdering the people upon whom he also obtruded them; thus paying off former crimes committed against the liberties of one people, with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another.
Those words above were removed from the official record, censored, taken out, and for "reasons" explained by Thomas Jefferson in his own published words on the official record for the first American federal Congress:
http://teachingamericanhistory.org/ratification/elliot/vol1/approaches/
The clause, too, reprobating the enslaving the inhabitants of Africa, was struck out in complaisance to South Carolina and Georgia, who had never attempted to restrain the importation of slaves, and who, on the contrary, still wished to continue it. Our northern brethren also, I believe felt a little tender under those censures; for, though their people had very few slaves themselves, yet they had been pretty considerable carriers of them to others.
There it is in your face, all you need to know, in order for you, or anyone else, to get a handle on any question of law anywhere anytime in America.
The criminals will infiltrate, take-over, government and they will effectively work at reaching for, taking, and maintaining, involuntary servitude, which is involuntary association, which is slavery, and they even have those crimes recorded in their own official paperwork.
The power of deception works in at least two ways:
1. Produce and disseminate false information.
2. Censor accurate accounting of the facts.
Next is crucial.
The following is a counterfeit common law court case transcript. The court case is the official record according to the criminals who continue to control the counterfeit government. This is crucial because this serves to report the accurate account on the official record while at the same time that official, accurate, account serves as a confession, just as the confession by Thomas Jefferson concerning "crimes against nature itself" as those who formed the American federation were being taken over by those who profit from "crimes against nature itself".
The reason why the next - crucial - evidence on the official record is counterfeit is the reasons enumerated:
1. The trial was delayed (by criminal means) so as to allow the perpetrators to "get away" with the crime that was proven to be a crime in the trial by jury case, which almost proceeded according to the common law.
2. The judge in the case perpetrated a crime called jury tampering when the judge in the case misinformed the jury concerning the common law procedures concerning the duties of the volunteer jurists. The jury in a common law trial by jury try the law, they try the facts, they find facts, they find guilt or innocence, and they find a just remedy, restitution, fine, or punishment according to their conscience, as the jury represents the whole country in trial by the country, which is trial by jury, which is the law of the land, which is legem terrae.
3. According to common sense, reason, and natural laws acknowledged by free people in liberty who volunteer to defend voluntary association, the discovery of significant threats to life, liberty, and property found by people - found through fact finding in trial by jury no less - constitutes cause for acting in defense against those clear and present dangers found in that due process called trial by jury according to the common law. In other words the official result of this trial by jury case is such that other people were found guilty of capital murder and NOTHING was done about that fact. That is not common law applied by free people in Liberty, that is in a term - COVER-UP.
http://www.thekingcenter.org/sites/default/files/KING%20FAMILY%20TRIAL%20TRANSCRIPT.pdf
THE COURT: In answer to the question did Loyd Jowers participate in a conspiracy to do harm to Dr. Martin Luther King, your answer is yes.
Do you also find that others, including governmental agencies, were parties to this conspiracy as alleged by the defendant? Your answer to that one is also yes.
The absurdity of asking the criminals to police themselves is at hand here, as it was over 200 years ago, and to suggest that the criminals - under the color of law - will do as asked, when asked politely, is tantamount to suicide by slow and painful, torturous, murderous, death.
Two more bits of information offered to help piece together this puzzle picture into something people can employ themselves are as follows, with quotes:
1. Bonding Code (those who are bond are chained) chaining down the government, chaining down the government by the laws that chain down the government, and the people volunteer to maintain these chains that chain down the government.
http://www.1215.org/lawnotes/work-in-progress/bonding-code.htm
9.2 - Escalation
Further:
A law enforcement officer will lose his bond if he oppresses a citizen to the point of civil. rebellion when that citizen attempts to obtain redress of grievances (U.S. constitutional 1st so-called amendment).
When a state, by and through its officials and agents, deprives a citizen of all of his remedies by the due process of law and deprives the citizen of the equal protection of the law, the state commits an act of mixed war against the citizen, and, by its behavior, the state declares war on the citizen. The citizen has the right to recognize this act by the publication of a solemn recognition of mixed war. This writing has the same force as the Declaration of Independence. It invokes the citizen's U.S. constitutional 9th and 10th so-called amend guarantees of the right to create an effective remedy where otherwise none exists.
"I found this insight on the UBC to be very perspicuous and most useful to the Patriot movement, but like all laws, it is useful only to the one(s) who use it and enforce it."
Remember the etymon at the tine of law's creation and The Federalist Papers. (Read and discern until it's perspicuous.)
"Prior law governs always." "Prior etymons govern always."
"To act in pro se fashion in a court of law or equity is to profess in law, thus, casting yourself to drift away from logic and into the arms of a fool."
Study the UBC, file your "criminal complaints" in timely fashion, take their money or their hides for future parchment.
MAXIM; (Universal Axiom of Law)
All persons know that the foundation of law and the legal system exists in the telling of the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, generally by testimony, deposition, and/or by affidavit. Therefore, every honorable judge requires those who appear before him to be sworn to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and is compelled by the high principles of his profession to protect that truth and do nothing to tamper with that truth, either directly or indirectly, either in person or by proxy, or by subornation of the affiant or other person (subornation/extortion of perjury).
This instrument is an Affidavit of Obligation, also known as a Claim of Lien. This affidavit of obligation is a commercial instrument arising from a private or public contract, either express, constructive, and/or implied, which exists by the express, constructive, and/or implied consent of the Lien Debtor. Therefore, this Affidavit of obligation is a consensual commercial lien. This lien arises from the necessity to guarantee specific performance (oath) of the Lien Debtor. Therefore, this Affidavit of obligation is also a z-just compensation commercial lien.
2. THE COMMERCIAL LIEN RIGHT AND THE MILITARY LIEN RIGHT
THE COMMERCIAL LIEN RIGHT AND THE MILITARY LIEN RIGHT
Two maxims govern the legal foundation of all civilized human societies, the Labor Maxim and the Equal Protection Maxim.
The prosperity of every nation is deeply affected by the degree to which its common citizens and its officials act in compliance with the Labor Maxim and the Equal Protection Maxim.
1. The Labor Maxim-
(a) A workman/labor is worthy of his hire/wage.
2. The Equal Protection Maxim-
(a) The law shall be equally applied to all persons.
(b) The law shall subject all persons to the same mode of regulation.
(c) All persons shall be equally protected by the law.
(d) All persons shall be equally obligated by the law.
3. The Contract Maxim- (Corollary Maxim)
(a) The commercial and social laws of contract shall be equally applied to all parties of the contract (persons and legal entities).
(b) The commercial and social laws of contract shall subject both opposite parties of a contract to the same mode of regulation.
(c) Both opposite parties to a contract are to be equally protected by the commercial and social laws of contract.
(d) Both opposite parties to a contract are to be equally obligated by the commercial and social laws of contract.
CONSTITUTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution for the U.S.A. [hereafter the U.S Constitution, or Constitution] are jointly the contract of specific performance between the U.S. citizens as the parties on one side of the agreement, and the U.S. government, its officers, employees, agents, and subcontractors as the parties on the other side of the agreement.
By the equal application of the law, every commercial and social lien right that tax financed public officials exercise or enforce against tax paying citizens provides tax paying citizens with an equal lien right that citizens can exercise or enforce against tax financed public officials.
Any attempt by a public official to deliberately deny any citizen the equal protection of the law or to evade the provision of the equal protection of the law constitutes a breach of the Constitution for the United States of America and constitutes a creation of either a commercial or a military lien right by the offending party.
THE COMMERCIAL LIEN RIGHT
GOVERNMENT:
CLR-G1: The government has a potential commercial lien right to collect/levy taxes from the citizen for specific performance (services) rendered by the government for the citizen.
CLR-G2: When the taxes are not paid by the citizen, then the citizen is in breach of contract and the government has a lien right against the citizen.
CLR-G3: When the citizen intentionally evades the payment of taxes, then the government’s lien right extends to the right of the government to seize the citizen’s personal property to pay the taxes.
Pursuant to the Labor Maxim, the Equal Protection Maxim, and the Contract Maxim, there exists a reciprocal statement of the citizen’s commercial lien right.
CITIZEN:
CLR-C1: The citizen has a potential commercial lien right to collect/levy political specific performance (services) from the government for taxes paid by the citizen to the government.
CLR-C2: When the political specific performance (services) is not forthcoming from the government, then the government is in breach of the contract and the citizen has the lien right against the government.
CLR-C3: When a public official deliberately violates the U.S. Constitution in the specific performance of his/her duties, then his/her act, being criminal in nature, places him/her outside the veil of corporate limited liability on his/her own personal liability, and then the citizen’s lien right extends to the right of the citizen to seize the politician’s/official’s real and personal property to pay for breach of specific performance (18 USC §§ 241 & 242, etc.).
THE MILITARY LIEN RIGHT
If the citizen’s attempt to exercise the commercial lien right against a public official is subverted by a Constitutional violation by that public official or by other public officials acting in conspiracy with that public official, then the public official or officials are engaging in mixed war and holding office in insurrection and rebellion against the Constitution, and, therefore, the military lien right is justified and is automatically activated thereby.
THE MILITARY LIEN RIGHT
GOVERNMENT:
MLR-G1: The government has a potential military lien right to collect/levy upon a citizen’s life for the conduction of a war (the draft), to protect this Nation/Country and its Constitution against all enemies both foreign and domestic.
MLR-G2: It is a demand for specific performance called military service, also known as the draft.
MLR-G3: When a person is drafted or inducted into the military to execute military duties of external protection of this Nation/Country and its Constitution, the citizen takes an oath to defend his/her Nation/Country and its Constitution against all enemies both foreign and domestic.
MLR-G4: If the citizen refuses to be drafted, in compliance with the U.S. Constitution, then he/she must be imprisoned. Otherwise, the military service is undermined and rendered ineffective.
MLR-G5: If the citizen runs in the face of the enemy and thus threatens to demoralize the military force of the Nation/Country, then he/she is subject to the penalty of death, and subject to being shot in the back by a government agent (military officer) as he/she runs away from the fight.
Pursuant to the Labor Maxim, the Equal Protection Maxim, and the Contract Maxim, there exists a reciprocal statement of the citizen’s military lien right:
CITIZEN:
MLR-C1: The citizen has a potential military lien right to collect/levy upon a public official’s life for the provision of public service (e.g., justice) to protect this Nation/Country and its Constitution against all enemies both foreign and domestic.
MLR-C2: It is a demand for specific performance called public service, justice, etc..
MLR-C3: When a person is elected, appointed, contracted, or compensated to execute political duties of internal protection of the Nation/Country and its Constitution, it is understood that such duties will be fulfilled in strict compliance with, enforcement of, and protection of this Nation/Country and its Constitution, and in full support of and respect for the sacrifices of the citizen as a soldier.
MLR-C4: If the public official refuses to provide the contracted public service (e.g., justice) in compliance with the U.S. Constitution, then he/she must be imprisoned. Otherwise, the public service is undermined and rendered ineffective.
MLR-C5: If the public official violates allegiance to the U.S. Constitution by deliberately violating the Constitution, or by deliberately treating the mandates of the Constitution with contempt, especially after being put on notice of, or reprimanded for, said contempt, and thereby acts as a domestic enemy of this Nation/Country and its Constitution by reversing the benefits gotten by the sacrifice of our soldiers, and thus threatens to demoralize the legal force of the Nation/Country, then that public official is lawfully subject to the penalty of death at the hand of the injured citizen or his/her assignee; because – any lesser penalty would allow the corrupt agents of the present government and the next corrupt ruling agents of the government to pardon the violation of the Constitution and laws of this Nation/Country, and would allow those agents to reward past evil performance by new employment of the offenders in the new regime (New World Order).
In American history, the Declaration of Independence served the legal purpose of making a Solemn Recognition of Mixed War, which is a Notice of Military Lien Right, a warning of No Trespass, an assertion that any killing or taking of human life necessary for the protection of the legal remedies of the common citizen is being done, in the immediate situation described in the Solemn Recognition or Notice, not as murder, but as lethal self-defense of the commercial and social remedy against the cited domestic enemy or enemies. The Declaration of Independence is the legal model or format for the construction of the Solemn Recognition of Mixed War and the Notice of Military Lien Right.
What the Criminal laws on the books say about Public officials who committ "TREASON":
18 USC § 2381 - Treason
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death...
Maybe if the Public officials are not willing to obey their own Laws, they should get themself a different job??
I, Moreless, absolutely do not advocate any kind of "Violence" against Public officials or any other human being. All I am doing here is presenting the Criminal Laws that are on the books that tell what can happen Lawfully to any Public official who becomes a "Domestic Enemy" by their very choice to trample on the Constitution and any Citizen's Freedoms, Liberties and Creator given Rights as secured by the Constitution for the united States of America and the laws pursuant thereof.
NOTE: It is beyond doubt that the criminals took over in 1787/89 by their own confessions such as the original confession by Thomas Jefferson concerning the huge profits of criminal slave traders infesting the original federal government. They (the criminals) set in motion their counterfeit laws where they (not the juries that represent the whole country of people in common law trial by jury due process - the law of the land - known in latin as legem terrae) and BY THEIR LAWS they confess that they are criminals deserving death as their punishment for their crimes. Will they volunteer to walk to the hangman's noose? Who do they say is in charge of validating accusations, which are then official accusations, which are then cause for action causing a trial by jury to proceed according to the common law?
This is vital, and all you are told to do is sit back and wait your turn in line, as the line moves closer and closer to hell on earth.
What did THEY say about who validates accusations against anyone - equal protection - within the jurisdiction of the law of the land?
Evidence 1 is found again in the original federal congress:
http://teachingamericanhistory.org/ratification/elliot/vol1/approaches/
On the same day, Congress unanimously resolved, “that the respective colonies are entitled to the common law of England, and more especially to the great and inestimable privilege of being tried by their peers of the vicinage according to the course of that law.” They further resolved, “that they were entitled to the benefit of such of the English statutes as existed at the time of their colonization, and which they have, by experience, respectively found to be applicable to their several and local circumstances.” They also resolved, that their ancestors, at the time of their immigration, were “entitled to all the rights, liberties, and immunities, of free and natural-born subjects within the realms of England.”
Evidence 2: From an American who studied trial by jury and published his findings around the time of the Civil War.
Trial by Jury by Lysander Spooner
http://www.barefootsworld.net/trial01.html
FOR more than six hundred years - that is, since Magna Carta, in 1215 - there has been no clearer principle of English or American constitutional law, than that, in criminal cases, it is not only the right and duty of juries to judge what are the facts, what is the law, and what was the moral intent of the accused; but that it is also their right, and their primary and paramount duty, to judge of the justice of the law, and to hold all laws invalid, that are, in their opinion, unjust or oppressive, and all persons guiltless in violating, or resisting the execution of, such laws.
Unless such be the right and duty of jurors, it is plain that, instead of juries being a "palladium of liberty "- a barrier against the tyranny and oppression of the government - they are really mere tools in its hands, for carrying into execution any injustice and oppression it may desire to have executed.
But for their right to judge of the law, and the justice of the law, juries would be no protection to an accused person, even as to matters of fact; for, if the government can dictate to a jury any law whatever, in a criminal case, it can certainly dictate to them the laws of evidence. That is, it can dictate what evidence is admissible, and what inadmissible, and also what force or weight is to be given to the evidence admitted. And if the government can thus dictate to a jury the laws of evidence, it can not only make it necessary for them to convict on a partial exhibition of the evidence rightfully pertaining to the case, but it can even require them to convict on any evidence whatever that it pleases to offer them.
That the rights and duties of jurors must necessarily be such as are here claimed for them, will be evident when it is considered what the trial by jury is, and what is its object. "The trial by jury," then, is a "trial by the country" - that is, by the people - as distinguished from a trial by the government.
It was anciently called "trial per pais" - that is, "trial by the country." And now, in every criminal trial, the jury are told that the accused "has, for trial, put himself upon the country; which country you (the jury) are." The object of this trial "by the country," or by the people, in preference to a trial by the government, is to guard against every species of oppression by the government. In order to effect this end, it is indispensable that the people, or "the country," judge of and determine their own liberties against the government; instead of the government's judging of and determining its own powers over the people. How is it possible that juries can do anything to protect the liberties of the people against the government, if they are not allowed to determine what those liberties are?
Any government, that is its own judge of, and determines authoritatively for the people, what are its own powers over the people, is an absolute government of course. It has all the powers that it chooses to exercise. There is no other - or at least no more accurate - definition of a despotism than this. On the other hand, any people, that judge of, and determine authoritatively for the government, what are their own liberties against the government, of course retain all the liberties they wish to enjoy. And this is freedom. At least, it is freedom to them; because, although it may be theoretically imperfect, it, nevertheless, corresponds to their highest notions of freedom.
To secure this right of the people to judge of their own liberties against the government, the jurors are taken, (or must be, to make them lawful jurors,} from the body of the people, by lot, or by some process that precludes any previous knowledge, choice, or selection of them, on the part of the government.
This is done to prevent the government's constituting a jury of its own partisans or friends; in other words, to prevent the government's packing a jury, with a view to maintain its own laws, and accomplish its own purposes.
Evidence 3 is the first federal constitution known as The Articles of Confederation.
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/artconf.asp
Freedom of speech and debate in Congress shall not be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Congress, and the members of Congress shall be protected in their persons from arrests or imprisonments, during the time of their going to and from, and attendence on Congress, except for treason, felony, or breach of the peace.
Evidence 4 is a trial by the country of free Americans in Liberty, which is not a British (criminal) run counterfeit court, it is a voluntary mutual defense - federated - court trial by jury according to the common law. The same common law that applies to everyone, including members of the federal congress, which includes the president of the federal congress, accordin to the original federal constitution.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/1/35/
Put on your thinking cap at this point please. Had the people in America won freedom in Liberty (for all) they would have afforded every single slave OWNER a trial by jury, and that includes OWNERS of Irish slaves, British soldiers enslaving American defenders, Mercinaries such as the Hessians working for pay to enslave Americans, and those infiltrators (traitors) in the original, organic, grass-roots, American federation who were gaining huge political and economic profits from their African Slave Trade, and these trials would be afforded to these Slave Owners (crimes against nature itself), because the victims would be protected equally as well as congressmen, and presidents of congress, governors, lawyers, judges, magistrates, and justices of the peace. An accusation by a slave, would have as much political power, and as much economic power, as any other accusation.
Evidence 5 again from Thomas Jefferson himself describing the law of the land in Virginia well before The British became openly beligerant with aggressive war.
http://xroads.virginia.edu/~hyper/JEFFERSON/ch14.html
The state is divided into counties. In every county are appointed magistrates, called justices of the peace, usually from eight to thirty or forty in number, in proportion to the size of the county, of the most discreet and honest inhabitants. They are nominated by their fellows, but commissioned by the governor, and act without reward. These magistrates have jurisdiction both criminal and civil. If the question before them be a question of law only, they decide on it themselves: but if it be of fact, or of fact and law combined, it must be referred to a jury. In the latter case, of a combination of law and fact, it is usual for the jurors to decide the fact, and to refer the law arising on it to the decision of the judges. But this division of the subject lies with their discretion only. And if the question relate to any point of public liberty, or if it be one of those in which the judges may be suspected of bias, the jury undertake to decide both law and fact. If they be mistaken, a decision against right, which is casual only, is less dangerous to the state, and less afflicting to the loser, than one which makes part of a regular and uniform system. In truth, it is better to toss up cross and pile in a cause, than to refer it to a judge whose mind is warped by any motive whatever, in that particular case. But the common sense of twelve honest men gives still a better chance of just decision, than the hazard of cross and pile. These judges execute their process by the sheriff or coroner of the county, or by constables of their own appointment. If any free person commit an offence against the commonwealth, if it be below the degree of felony, he is bound by a justice to appear before their court, to answer it on indictment or information. If it amount to felony, he is committed to jail, a court of these justices is called; if they on examination think him guilty, they send him to the jail of the general court, before which court he is to be tried first by a grand jury of 24, of whom 13 must concur in opinion: if they find him guilty, he is then tried by a jury of 12 men of the county where the offence was committed, and by their verdict, which must be unanimous, he is acquitted or condemned without appeal. If the criminal be a slave the trial by the county court is final.
All slaves (of any kind of slavery, such as the modern version known euphemistically as human trafficking, and including debt slavery) are equally protected according to the common laws of free people in liberty through trial by the country, which is trial by the moral conscience of the whole country, AND, according to the laws reported by the criminal slave traders themselves; which they must do (even if they don't obey the laws) in order to keep up the color of law. So...the laws are on the books, and in the moral conscience of free people in liberty.
Evidence 6. On the books, even according to stare decisis rules, which do not govern the conscience of free people in liberty, but which serve to govern, by precident, anyone failing to have command of moral conscience, or accurate judicial memory.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/1/236/
It is a matter well known, and well understood, that by the laws of our country, every question which affects a man's life, reputation, or property, must be tried by twelve of his peers; and that their unanimous verdict is, alone, competent to determine the fact in issue. If then, you undertake to enquire, not only upon what foundation the charge is made, but, likewise, upon what foundation it is denied, you will, in effect, usurp the jurisdiction of the Petty Jury, you will supercede the legal authority of the court, in judging of the competency and admissibility of witnesses, and, having thus undertaken to try the question, that question may be determined by a bare majority, or by a much greater number of your body, than the twelve peers prescribed by the law of the land. This point has, I believe, excited some doubts upon former occasions but those doubts have never arisen in the mind of any lawyer, and they may easily be removed by a proper consideration of the subject. For, the bills, or presentments, found by a grand Jury, amount to nothing more than an official accusation, in order to put the party accused upon his trial: 'till the bill is returned, there is, therefore, no charge from which he can be required to exculpate himself; and we know that many persons, against whom bills were returned, have been afterwards acquitted by a verdict of their country. Here then, is the just line of discrimination: It is the duty of the Grand Jury to enquire into the nature and probable grounds of the charge; but it is the exclusive province of the Petty Jury, to hear and determine, with the assistance, and under the direction of the court, upon points of law, whether the Defendant is, or is not guilty, on the whole evidence, for, as well as against, him.
There it is, generally, the problem and the solution before you, based upon the actual law of the land, which is the moral conscience of all the people all the time (such as it may or may not be in actual fact) and the counterfeit laws put in place by the criminals themselves as they take over the government under the color of law. They - the criminal slave traders - must admit that law applies to themselves too, for if they do not the color of law vanishes, and the criminals are known as criminals as was the case when the Americans called out The British with that Declaration of Independence.
When criminals begin to perpetrate crimes it is too late in law to prevent - by deterrence - that specific crime in that place at that time, but that does not prevent the rest of humanity from gaining the power to reinstate rule of law which does the best that mankind can do to produce and maintain that required power of deterrence where crime no longer pays so well as to inspire more, and more, and more, criminals to seek that line of business because there are so many willing slaves to rape, rob, torture, and murder.
If we wait until there are no victims left, then there are no victims left, including the mirror image.