Tuesday, July 07, 2009

* * * Grand Juries: Are They The Enemy of The People? * * *

J.A.I.L. News Journal
Judicial  Accountability  Initiative  Law

Los Angeles, CA                                 Month July 7, 2009

A Public Service Announcement to America

(To be removed from this PSA see instructions below)


The Battle Lines are Drawn:  J.A.I.L. versus The Foreign Power 

A Power Foreign to Our Constitution

Mission Statement      JNJ Library        Federal J.A.I.L.

FAQs              What?MeWarden?

Grand Juries:

Are They The Enemy of The People?


By Ron Branson – National J.A.I.L. CIC



Judicial Accountability Initaiative Law (J.A.I.L.) has received a very excellent  comment regarding Grand Juries which deserves addressing. C. Sulivan – charpes1@cox.net, writes, "I agree with the overdue need by all the victims of judicial corruption to expose the corruption, but [using] the Grand Jury is using the very corrupt process to expose the corruption. Here in Conneticutt, we have no Grand Jury."


Sulivan presents a matter that is a concern to most all of us. Most people in this country think of the Grand Jury as an arm of the prosecution, and therefore a body of which one needs to beware.


The following is going to be quite educational to most every American, and will reveal our general ignorance respecting government. Our Founding Fathers, in creating our government, feared an all-powerful government, and sought to break up this power with checks and balances, and even cross-checks. They knew what they were doing, but over the passage of time We the People, lost the purpose and meaning of what they had created to prevent exactly what our nation has become.


They created for us petit juries (small juries) to try cases, and Grand Juries (large juries) to determine Probable Cause and to indict whom they will. The greatest organized power on earth is that of the creation of Grand Juries. Grand Juries have more power of discretion than do governors, legislatures, the president, and even the U.S. Supreme Court. You naturally are wondering, "How so?" The Fith Amendment of our Constitution states, "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury…" The only exception is by the military during the time of actual war that is declared by Congress. (Interestingly, is the fact that Congress has never declared war since the Second World War). The powers and duties of Grand Juries cannot be usurped by any other body of government. Their discretion is uniquely theirs.


A capital crime is the death penalty, and infamous crimes are felonies. Probable Cause can be determined only by a Grand jury in such cases, not by a magistrate or a  judge. Magistrates can determine Probable Cause only in misdemeanor cases. (Another interesting point is Sulivan's statement, "Here in Connecticut, we have no Grand Jury." This means that anyone may literally get away with murder in the State of Connecticut because constitutionally no one in Connecticut can be held to answer for any capitol or infamous crime. Talk about a "get out of jail free" card, if what Sulivan says is true, then constitutionally every prison door within the state of Connecticut must be swung open and a release must be made of every "convicted" felon or murderer on death row for the lack of P.C. even after a so-called "trial" has taken place because such people could not be held to answer for such "crimes."


Constitutionally, there are only two classes of crimes, and they are "High crimes and misdemeanors." If it is not a high crime, then it has to be a misdemeanor. There is no such thing constitutionally as an "infraction." Infractions were invented out of the evil minds of certain California Legislators in 1969, which conspiracy was designed to deprive all its victims of the Fourth-Amendment due processs of Probable Cause by a magistrate, the right to the Assistance of Counsel, and the absolute right to a trial by jury. Nothwithstanding, our Constitution still says in Article III, Section 2, Clause 3, "The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury." The purpose was to create a greater revenue base and cut trial costs for California.


Most all of the states thought it was a good idea to deprive everyone of jury trials and so they followed suit. It amazes me how that a failure to acquire a dog license, or fastening of a seat belt, or a light bulb going out, is equal to impeachment proceedings, which is the only constitutional exception to jury trials. So what, if they can get away wth it. Now you may be saying, "The government just could not afford to enforce every crime they cited if they had to determine Probable Cause for every crime and provide jury trials for everyone. Ah! now it becomes clear what our Founding Fathers had in mind for America when they designed our Constitution, and it was not maximizing revenue. Our Declaration of Independence touches on this in its words, "He (King George III) has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance."


We stand and place our hand over our heart and eloquently sing at the top of our voices The Star Spangled Banner, and pledge allegiance to the flag, and then say, "God bless America," but in reality there can be no United States of America without a properly-constituted Grand Jury, neither can there be a Constitution of the United States, nor laws in pursuance thereof without an appropriate Grand Jury. The Grand Jury is the center of all power in this country. It is the Chief Cornerstone of our nation.


Finally, let's address Sullivan's concern as to whether the Grand Jury is the enemy of the People. When we hear the term "Grand Jury," we natually think of what we have today as being the Grand Jury; however, the "grand juries" of today is a different animal from that intended for its creation by our Founding Fathers. One must understand that our "government" of today has usurped the government intended by our Founding Fathers, but we still call it "government." It is actually the re-enactment of what our Founding Fathers contended with in 1776, i.e., "He [the King] has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws, giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation."


It has been appropriately stated, "No man's life, liberty, or property is safe so long as the legislature is in session." This is what our Founding Fathers meant when they used their term, "jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution" and "acts of pretended legislation!" Thomas Jefferson stated "In matters of power, let no more be heard of the confidence in man, but bind them down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution." This responsibility of holding our legislators to the Constitution was committed by the Founding Fathers to the judiciary. The question we are faced with today is: Who is to be the check upon the judiciary who is to be a check upon the legislators?


Today, "grand juries" are hand-picked by the judges, advised by prosecutors, and forbidden by the "legislature" from investigating judges, in favour of biased judicial commissions who are committed to cover for their brethern no matter what, unless it be to save face for the system. These commissions never prosecute judicial wrongs, rather they prosecute embarrassment. The secret message is, go ahead and do all the evil you wish, just don't get caught with your pants down.


In 1960 the California legislature "took away" the power of "grand juries" to investigate judges, and turned that power over to a specially created commission, which amounted in reality to accountability of judges to judges. This tipped the scales to public outcry, and so one more "citizen" than judges were added to this commission. But wait a minute! Examine this line of non-judges on this commission. The governor (who appoints the judges) is allowed one non-judge choice, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the state is allowed his choice of a non-judge, the State Attorney General (who is defense attorney for all the judges) is allowed one non-judge choice, and then the State Bar Association is allowed their vote of one non-judge, and lastly is the head of the taxing forum (the State Board of Equalization) is allowed one vote for a non-judge. All the rest are judges. This, of course, makes a total joke of the entire judicial accountability process, while forcing the "grand jury" to sit on their hands, or chase after the bones that are thrown to them to keep them busy.


These so-called "grand juries" of today are the most dispised operation one can imagine within our so-called "government." The foreign power taking control of America knew full well that if they were going to accomplish their ursurpation of government, they would have to get the Grand Jury out of the way. So rather than dissolve it, they decided to water it down and deprive it of workable funds.


Here in California, a sixteen-year-old school girl working a Mc Donald's Hamburger earns much more salary than does every "grand juror" in the state. The "grand jurors" are not even allowed the national mandatory minimum wage due everyone else. Further, their budget is designed to deprive them of any workable capital to properly function as a Grand Jury. This all is not a coincidence, folks, it was planned this way. Remember, their goal is to ursurp all government. That simply could not be done with a properly-constituted Grand Jury. They had to overthrow the Grand Jury to fullfill their goal to overthrow America.


Consider this: The purpose of the Grand Jury is to be a shield and a sword. A shield to protect the People from arbitrary prosecution, yet we now have the prosecutor advising and feeding our watchdog of the prosecution. The Grand Jury has the widest latitude of discretion of indictment of anyone in government, including judges, yet we have the judges hand-picking the "grand jurors" and passing "pretended legislation" that they cannot investigate judges. What's wrong here?


We have all heard the statement that the affinity between prosecutors and "grand jurors" is so strong that any prosecutor can get an indict of a ham sandwich. Well, with this in mind, J.A.I.L. has received reports of rubber-stamped indictments of non-existant Grand Juries. The process is alleged to work like this. The prosecutor types up the indictment his wishes to acquire from the "grand jury." He then pulls out his desk drawer and grabs a rubber stamp with the name of the foreman of the "grand jury" on it, and he then stamps his self-prepared indictment with the signature of the "grand jury" foreman. We concede the following report needs to be vendicated but here is the reposrt J.A.I.L. has received.


"All calls for Grand Jury logs and transcripts to the clerk's office in these 6 cases were met with statements that the U.S. Attorneys are holding the records. In one case in San Diego, a clerk had a copy of the Grand Jury log which showed that no Grand Jury even convened on the day that the indictment was handed down.  In other words, no Grand Jury existed. ….  A former prosecutor confirmed that the U.S. Attorneys' office has a rubber stamp with the signature of the Grand Jury foreman in its office, which is often used on superseding indictments in lieu of actually reconvening a Grand Jury. That action would constitute fraud on its face, fraud from the inducement, and require not only that the case be overturned but that the prosecutors involved in this corruption be prosecuted and disbarred. ….


Checks in the 7th Circuit show that over 99 percent of all Grand Jury proceedings result in an indictment, a number so high it is unbelievable. ….  A check of over 100 different docket sheets … shows only one Grand Jury concurrence form listed, i.e., less than 1 % of all cases can prove that a Grand Jury actually met… "


I have said, the United State of America cannot long stand without a properly-constituted Grand Jury. This is why We the People absolutely must pass such properly-constituted Grand Jury through our Initiative Process as set forth in the Judicial Accountability Initiative Law (J.A.I.L.) such as found at http://www.jail4judges.org/state_chapters/ca/Initiative/CaliforniaJAILInitiative.htm


 "If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?" Ps.11:3


J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.orghas been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries.

To manage your email, place the word Subscribe or Unsubscribe

in 'subject' line and hit reply. Your request will be automatically & instantly



Our Founding Fathers said, "...with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine

Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and

our sacred honor." Dec. of Independence. We are a ministry in great need of

your financial support. Donate to this vitally important work at;

"J.A.I.L."  P.O. Box 207, North Hollywood, CA 91603


J.A.I.L. is a unique addition to our Constitution heretofore unrealized.

JAIL is powerful! JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope!


E-Group sign on at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/join

Visit our active flash - http://www.jail4judges.org/national_001.htm


*   *   *

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to

our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to

their acts of pretended legislation.    - Declaration of Independence
"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless

minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.."  - Samuel Adams
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is

striking at the root."   -- Henry David Thoreau                     ><)))'>



Post a Comment

<< Home