 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
I know all about your common law courts argument, and it doesn’t hold water. It has deceived alot of people into spending all their money uselessly, and gotten many more into serious legal troubles where they’ve lost everything. It’s a scam, just an excuse to do nothing.
Lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way.”
First:
Subpoena
That is a hard one to spell, but not as hard as bureaucrat.
Second:
Someone thinks that the world is run by “leaders” and “followers” as if someone is a paying member of the Cult of Might Makes Right: Subsidized Bureaucracy.
Third:
A Grand Jury is lawfully created so as to preempt crime in a geographical area as confirmed in the writing of Thomas Jefferson:
“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.”
One individual does not suddenly decide to “gather your jury.”
The individual named “Mark” is creating a fictional version of a fictional argument between “Mark” and his fictional opponent, and none of his words have anything to do with me or the problems facing mankind.
Either people agree to defend each other from clear and present dangers to all life on earth or people do not do so, even if “Mark” is working for the Cult.