 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
Sir William Scroggs January 1, 1728
E. & R. Nutt, and R. Gosling
“The Steward may impose a Fine upon one who is elected Constable by the Jury, “
Note the date 1728. At some point after Magna Carta (1215) the nature of law decidedly turned from a just nature to a criminal nature as “jurisdiction” shifted out of the hands of the people themselves (juries, sheriffs, and whatever words are used to mean volunteers volunteering to help secure mutual defense, holding to an accurate accounting of who is a victim and who is a criminal), and “jurisdiction” was taken (by criminal means) by people who counterfeit the law power (finding the truth in any matter), as the criminal elements begin to construct and maintain counterfeit versions of Courts.
The original courts (natural law) were made up of the people themselves, selected randomly, and these law officers were jurors. What was the extent of the lawful powers of these jurors in their jurisdictions?
There above in quotes is an example of the lawful powers of these jurors at a time when the counterfeiting of the law was already working to a great extent, as measured by claims of counterfeit authority in opposition to the authority already recognized as authority commanded by those jurors.
Jurors are representatives of the people as a whole, as confirmed by the fact that jurors were selected randomly. The power of selecting jurors is thereby taken out of the hands of special interest groups, and the power of selecting jurors is given to chance, or is a power given up by any number of people less than the whole number of people: The Public. The power given up by any special interest group (such as The Government), or the accuser, or the defendant, is a power given to more than just chance. The lottery of jury selection is authorized as a known advancement in science. It is not necessary to place a defendant before the whole country, and it is not necessary to place a prosecutor (accuser) before the whole country to prove guilt to the whole country, and it is not necessary to assemble the whole country in a trial to then demand a unanimous decision made by the whole country of people, in order to then unleash the violent actions of law upon presumed to be innocent accused defendants, or to ask for a fine. It is not necessary to ask the whole country to assemble for the purpose of finding a fact in a lawful case.
It is possible to find what the whole country (The Public) demands for justice in any case by assembling representative samples of the whole country, but to do so there can be no “jury stacking,” or “packing a jury,” which is a subset of “jury tampering.” If a portion of The Public, a side, a half, a majority, a minority, a fourth, a segment, a gang, a corporation, or other division of the whole, or something less than the whole, takes it upon themselves to hand pick those who will be on or off the jury, then obvious bias is in place, which thereby counterfeits the will of The Public, turning the will of The Public into a Special Interest Group using government power to perpetrate an obvious crime added to whichever is the alleged crime in any case. The government for the people as a whole becomes a weapon in the hands of criminals. The capacity of the people to defend themselves voluntarily becomes the capacity of a segment of the people gaining absolute power over their defenseless victims.
What powers (jurisdiction) are commanded by jurors in any case, anywhere, anytime, on this planet? Jurors in the information quoted - apparently - commanded the power to elect a Constable.
Why would jurors elect a Constable?
Why would true jurors elect a Constable?
Why would counterfeit jurors be allowed to, or told to, elect a Constable?
As late in the game as this document is dated, it may be important to note that the process (the game) of counterfeiting true law, doing so piecemeal, one small step at a time, is - the process of counterfeiting is - most like the original at the start of the crime, and least like the original at the point where the original is no longer visible to the public.
At the start of the crime of counterfeiting government power (voluntary mutual defense through accurate accountability of the facts that matter in every case) the people commanded all jurisdiction civil and criminal, no matter what meaning some imposter might claim as the meaning of the word civil or criminal. The people, not the government, determine any fact at issue in any case.
That was at the start of the counterfeiting job done by the criminals, and that was still visible to the public as late as 1787 in Pennsylvania:
“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.”
U.S. Supreme Court
RESPUBLICA v. SHAFFER, 1 U.S. 236
Court of Oyer and Terminer, at Philadelphia
February Sessions, 1788
Previous to the confidence scheme imposed by a criminal force, the people, in a jury, elected a Constable. After the confidence scheme imposed by a criminal force, the criminals routinely stack juries, pack juries, lie to juries, coerce juries, threaten juries, extort juries, own juries, control juries, tamper with juries, bypass juries, torture presumed to be innocent people into false confessions known as “plea bargains,” and profit exhorbitantly while counterfeiting the anceint power of law that is commanded by the people themselves.
Is it the Grand Jury or the Trial Jury in the Court Leet of England 1728 whereby the people elect a Constable, and to what purpose in either case?
Possible reasons:
A Grand Jury (independent individuals moved into action - cause - by the need to keep the peace for The Public as a whole) may elect a Constable to issue a subpoena to a reluctant witness, such as an accused individual mentioned in an affidavit placed into the record by a victim or a witness to a crime.
Is that true? If true it is as true now, as it was when it was generally understood to be true; understood by The Public at large.
A Trial Jury (independent individuals moved into action - cause - by the need to keep the peace for The Public as a whole) may elect a Constable to issue a subpoena to a reluctant witness, such as an accused individual mentioned in an affidavit placed into the record by a victim or witness to a crime.
Is that true? If true it is as true now, as it was when it was generally understood to be true; understood by The Public at large.
How dumb is the The Public at large now? How did The Public at large generally become so dumb?
Anyone, anywhere, is randomly or otherwise elected to serve on a Grand or Trial Jury and they are well informed about their legal, lawful, authorized, justified, moral, powers in any case, anywhere, anytime, and they are not the government, per se.
I am someone. So, theoretically, and not conspiratorially theoretic as in Conspiracy Theory, I (or anyone else) can imagine commanding this lawful power being offered in these words that have specific meaning, while at the same time these words can be misconstrued to mean the opposite: counterfeit.
Theoretically it is humanly possible to imagine a lawful county of republican nature (res-publica means The Public Thing) whereby a lawful Grand Jury is constituted out of independent people (not controlled by the government), and these people agree by some manner to present a member of the government with a court date.
Why would anyone start sweeping at the bottom step on a very long stairway?