 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
So Jane Doe contacts a common law Justice of the Peace, also knowable as a Magistrate, who is one of the most honest, and one of the most discrete individuals working for free (no conflict of interest) as an official member of the people of that county who commands all jurisdiction criminal and civil in that county.
Call that individual Jack Peoples. So Jane Doe finds Jack Peoples and hands over the official accusation concerning John Smith.
Jack Peoples says, hey, lady, John Smith is the Governor of this independent State in this county in this Federation of Independent States. Jane Doe says yea, what of it?
Jack Peoples says, nothing, nothing, I'll take this to the next step just like every other accusation is done, which is, I need to ask for some evidence.
Jane Doe ushers in her daughter, who is in a basket, having been chopped up by John Smith, according to Jane Doe, and here is a video tape, which is a Pedophile Stuff Film, staring John Smith and company, sold in the Dark Web, if you know where to find it.
Jack Peoples says, OK, good enough, but I must be discrete about this, and I'll contact the Sheriff to help protect you from many potential dangers, and I must advise you to keep this quiet until the evidence can be examined thoroughly by the Grand Jury formed from all 100 of us volunteer Justices of the Peace here in this county, is that OK Mrs. Doe? We also want to avoid a trial in the press, as you may know in history the criminals in government are often using the power they steal and command - under the color of law - to usurp the fact finding process known as the press, so we want to avoid poisoning the pool of petty jurors with lies, OK, is that OK Mrs. Doe?
Mrs. Doe asks if the Sherriff can be trusted. Jack Peoples replies with yes, and she - the lady Sherriff - has a lot of potential helpers as she is fully aware of what Posse Commitatus actually means, she can deputize everyone, including the Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, National Guard, and all the police forces, and Highway Patrol in this county. She can also ask for help from the Sherriff in the neighboring counties, and we can also ask for help from Sheriffs in other independent States volunteering to join this Federation. We can ask for help from U.S. Marshalls too. All who are familiar with the true common law can help, all those suffering from deception, like, perhaps, the governor John Smith, well, you get out of what you nourish don't you Mrs. Doe? I'm very sorry for your loss, Mrs. Doe, and before this can happen again, we will move along swiftly.
Keep in MIND please:
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. You will therefore, readily perceive, that if you examine the witnesses on both sides, you do not confine your consideration to the probable grounds of charge, but engage completely in the trial of the cause; and your return must, consequently, be tantamount to a verdict of acquital, or condemnation. But this would involve us in another difficulty; for, by the law it is declared that no man shall be twice put in jeopardy for the same offence: and, yet, it is certain that the enquiry, now proposed by the Grand Jury, would necessarily introduce the oppression of a double trial. Nor is it merely upon maxims of law, but, I think, likewise, upon principles of humanity, that this innovation should be opposed. Considering the bill as an accusation grounded entirely upon the testimony in support of the prosecution, the Petty Jury receive no biass from the sanction which the indorsement of the Grand Jury has conferred upon it. But, on the other hand, would it not, in some degree, prejudice the most upright mind against the Defendant, that on a full hearing of his defence, another tribunal had pronounced it insufficient? which would then be the natural inference from every true bill. Upon the whole, the court is of opinion, that it would be improper and illegal to examine the witnesses, on behalf of the Defendant, while the charge against him lies before the Grand Jury.
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:
These magistrates have jurisdiction both criminal and civil.
Jane Doe takes a common law lawful accusation to another member of the people at large NOT TO ONE OF THE CRIMINALS HIRED TO PROTECT THE CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION.
The criminal organization USURPED the federation in 1789, and they did so first with the Judiciary Act of 1789.
In place of common law was placed a counterfeit version of law, so as to deceive, based upon a common legal fiction.
http://www.barefootsworld.net/antifederalist.html#afp41-43B
The city, and all the places in which the union shall have this exclusive jurisdiction, will be immediately under one entire government, that of the federal head, and be no part of any state, and consequently no part of the United States. The inhabitants of the federal city and places, will be as much exempt from the laws and control of the state governments, as the people of Canada or Nova Scotia will be. Neither the laws of the states respecting taxes, the militia, crimes of property, will extend to them; nor is there a single stipulation in the constitution, that the inhabitants of this city, and these places, shall be governed by laws founded on principles of freedom. All questions, civil and criminal, arising on the laws of these places, which must be the laws of congress, must be decided in the federal courts; and also, all questions that may, by such judicial fictions as these courts may consider reasonable, be supposed to arise within this city, or any of these places, may be brought into these courts. By a very common legal fiction, any personal contract may be supposed to have been made in any place. A contract made in Georgia may be supposed to have been made in the federal city; the courts will admit the fiction. . . .
Those are the words of Richard Henry Lee (according to some sources) who was the 6th President of The United States of American in Congress Assembled BEFORE the usurpation of 1787/89.