 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
Nobody,
My use of quotes are offered specifically for the purpose of validating the information that you offer at a crucial time. People reading this who are unfamiliar with such terms as indictment, True Bill, and presentment, may want something more than the words of someone responding to an article on the internet, to validate the information you have offered.
I think there is a remote possibility that the information you offer might actually help people who are in this specific situation where they seek actual due process of law. Rather than having financial transfers flowing from public funds: awarding victims of "government overreach," rather than that the true goal is to hold each individual perpetrator to account for the specific crimes perpetrated by those criminals; and if there is punishment then it is the whole country, through the petty jury, whose job is to decide on what constitutes redemption, remedy, and restoration. Punishment, or revenge, is not the goal.
I've heard this specific type of thinking expressed by Ammon Bundy in an interview with Kelli Stewart.
Wrong: Government entity pays damages to victims of crimes perpetrated by individual government agents: money is (counterfeited, printed out of thin air?) to pay damages to victims of "government overreach." The perpetrators are free to resume criminal activity under the color of law.
Right: Victims employ their "equal protection of the law" access to a (common law) Grand Jury: see Bill of Rights. Grand Jury is made up of people who are not affiliated with foreign corporations posing as legal experts (not BAR members), and the charges brought to them by Finicum or Bundy family members are investigated and in at least one case there is a confession of withholding evidence already on the official record, recorded by the "judge" (BAR member), the Grand Jury members (unless they are criminals themselves) would have a clear duty to move the course of due process (common law: see Bill of Rights) to the petty jury trial phase. The people as a whole are represented in the Grand Jury, specifically not BAR members, specifically not employees working for a corporate (for profit) business, and as such they are free, and at liberty, to see the facts before them for what they are, a clear case of - at least - withholding evidence, and that part of due process moves the accusation from mere accusation to the petty jury phase.
The trial then generates a public access transcript. An example of a public access trial transcript is The Martin Luther King Jr. Conspiracy Murder Trial Transcript.
Example:
Page: 434
"Then when they had the
plea-bargaining business, I said to myself,
here is this justice system, the most
important American perhaps other than the
President of the United States has been
killed, and they are going to have a
plea-bargaining instead of a full-scale trial
so that a court of law can tell us, can give
us a full transcript of what that murder is
about."
Correctly pointing out that the victims in this or any case ought to attempt to gain access to the grand jury in their county so as to follow the prescribed due course of law is a very important point.
I had also heard during Interviews with the Bundy's that they were unaware of a system that would work toward the goal of holding the individual perpetrators to account, and that confession of ignorance reinforces the need to point out this specific step in due process.
If the judge is not a real judge, confessed by action if not words. If the prosecutor is shown to be a criminal in the official words of the judge. If the defense attorneys are unaware of, or failing to advise their clients of the purpose of a grand jury (according to the known common law principles, if not named as such) so as to validate the accusations against the members of "the government" who are accused of crimes, and put those individuals on their trial (according to the common law: see Bill of Rights), then it might become clear to more than a few people, that the government has been counterfeited.
If the government has been counterfeited, where then is the real government?
Is it true (or not true) that these specific people have tried to gain access to the local, county, grand jury, so as to move the real government due process through that crucial step?
I don't know.