After reading for the past few days, I have found an interpretation of the Supreme Court that is worthwhile noting. In the case US v. Williams;
Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, confirmed that the American grand jury is neither part of the judicial, executive nor legislative branches of government, but instead belongs to the people. It is in effect a fourth branch of government "governed" and administered to directly by, and on behalf of the American people, and its authority emanates from the Bill of Rights.
Thus, citizens have the unbridled right to empanel their own grand juries and present "True Bills" of indictment to a court, which is then required to commence a criminal proceeding. Our Founding Fathers presciently thereby created a "buffer" the people may rely upon for justice,
when public officials, including judges, criminally violate the law
This statement from the Court appears to eliminate the Statutory Grand Jury altogether, for it is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Justice arm of the Government. Thereby all indictments by such manner are null and void of law, using past rulings.
Chew on that for a minute while I digress on another avenue that we should entertain.
If we have lawfully constituted and empanelled a Grand Jury then we should use it as intended with a small case that can be ‘staged’ with people that have a ‘beef‘ with each other. They will contact us and as that we hear their case then meet out an agreement that both parties are willing to sign on to. Then, we have accomplished a ruling and we can have posted in the county clerk’s office. We just continue on, without the blessings of the local or state justice dept.
We will continue to make rulings and meet out ‘just’ agreements and by and large will give ourselves clout that the Justice Dept fails to give. Then if a court strikes it down then the plaintiff or defendant can sue the Justice dept in their court. Then we are not in court as a def. or plaintiff…just as a witness.
I’m not a lawyer but as Mr. Bill Thornton says, it is reason in action. Let me know what you and Gerard thinks, and if positive, then I can call in and bring it up as an idea whose time has come.
It is not that I’m against charging the conspirators, but we should just go on past them and with the will of the people behind us, then the issue would be moot. That is how you show Justice with Compassion and Mercy, by not raking them over the coals.
We were never out for a pound of flesh anyway.
-Jim B (mrbagobeans)
The jurist orientation, which all jurists will receive, is a thorough education in the history and principles of the Common Law. Once educated in the simple yet profound concepts, jurists will not need to "practice" by hearing made up cases. Their oath says it all.
What I can see occurring after the Common Law Grand Juries gain access to the courthouse will be discussions as to statutes which may be held as necessary for the good of the community. Each community will need to review, and make sure they are not about controlling the behavior of the people, but establish guidelines for order. For example, will we require driver licenses? Age limitations? In addition, there will be guidelines for penalties for injuries, so each case will be treated equitably as the jury pool changes, keeping in mind that each case is to be heard and judged on its own merit. We will have lots to do once we have the keys.
I think the question of hearing a case referred to the Common Law Grand Jury would be a good one to discuss on one of our Monday Night Calls. I will submit that to John with your permission Jim.
Kathy
It only makes sense that if we wait for the blessing of the justice dept. in the individual areas we will whither and die on the vine.
This chain of comments appears to be a good topic for the proposed study group.
I agree!