[Victims of Court Corruption] Despairing Situation - So what are we going to do about it?

Zena, thank you for your response. I would love to discuss these options of which you speak.

Ron

*   *   *

Zena Crenshaw wrote:

Ron, thank you, thank you so much for your civil and sensible response.

 

Unfortunately I'm in the middle of meeting some critical deadlines, but I hope to soon have an opportunity to share with you why:

 

1.  many people of good faith, who have little or nothing in common with anarchists, would want more institutional support from government than J.A.I.L. contemplates, even in executing something like J.A.I.L.;

 

2.  there are sound (and, therefore, good faith) reasons for concluding that some aspects of the judicial oversight you propose through J.A.I.L., counters if not outright violates America's separation of powers; plus why the prospect of any such breach can be avoided by having randomly selected panels of private citizens oversee state judicial disciplinary processes.  As to our federal judiciary, there are certain perfectly lawful, citizen-based programs that would effectively put it in check;

 

3.  the grassroots legal/judicial reform should be much more alarmed that through caselaw (as opposed to indirect misconduct or corruption) our federal judiciary and state judiciaries have made it pretty impossible to allege a viable cause of action based on any form of unlawful judicial bias, EVEN IF we were otherwise free to sue judges.  In other words, our crusade against judicial immunity is arguably focused on trees while the forest is being missed; and

 

4.  mainstream America, including a significant number of accomplished lawyers and esteemed law professors, would probably support the legal/judicial reform advocacy I'm referencing, especially if grassroots legal/judicial reform activists enthusiastically supported it.

 

By attempting to discuss these matters with you, I don't presume to try talking you into anything, but I do hope our dialogue won't be futile.  There will be no hard feelings on my part if you choose not to have the discussion with me that I'm proposing.  However, if having it interests you at all, I would welcome the opportunity.

 

So what do you think?

 

Zena    

 

 

On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Ron Branson <VictoryUSA@jail4judges.org> wrote:

Zena, I am seeking the same type of support as sought by our Founding Fathers in the establishment of this nation when they said, "[W]ith a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, or fortunes and our sacred honor." I suppose the answer to your question would be based upon one's view as to whether they were anarchists or lent sympathetic ears to their plight by working within prescribed channels.

Ron



Zena Crenshaw wrote:

Ron,

 

I don't say this to be critical, but Jail4Judges reflects such an exclusion of institutional support from government that it seems only anarchists or near anarchists could consider its execution manageable.  Are anarchists and near anarchists your intended base of support?

Jacob,

Do you recognize the conflict in any of us despairing about the corruption of America's legal system and judiciary while feeling little to no need to rally in support of private lawyers, prosecutors, and judges who are terminated and/or suspended or disbarred from their profession for challenging judicial misconduct or corruption?

Though corresponding whistleblower protection is only an aspect of my legal/judicial reform advocacy, some and perhaps many people brand me as more sympathetic to the plight of legal professionals than other legal abuse victims as a result.  What they're more so detecting is that I work through prescribed public service programs and don't jump indiscriminately from one reform effort to another.  

Ron and Jacob, I encourage both of you to respond to my questions and comments above.

Thank you,
Zena

On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Ron Branson <VictoryUSA@jail4judges.org> wrote:

Jacob Roginski, we have share the same speaking podium together. Have you ever given much serious thought about JAIL4Judges as the only means of getting out of this mess? There is no other way than setting up an Independent Special Grand Jury of the common People who uniquely determine if any judge should enjoy the protections of judicial immunity for their wayward actions, i.e., paragraph 2 of the J.A.I.L. Initiative,
 
"Notwithstanding common law or any other provision to the contrary, no immunities shielding a judge from frivolous and harassing actions shall be construed to extend to any deliberate violation of law, fraud or conspiracy, intentional violation of due process of law, deliberate disregard of material allegations, judicial acts without jurisdiction, blocking of a lawful conclusion of a case, or any deliberate violation of the Constitutions of California or the United States."

Ron Branson


Jacob wrote:

Robert,

We must seek unity, break out of the molds the elites have squeezed us in, stop blaming each other for the condition of the country,  and open our minds to at last an honest and thoughtful examination of where we are, how we got here, and what must be done for change.  When the government is failing us so fundamentally, when the ruling class propaganda no longer sounds credible even to the least politically discerning among us, it is time to re-examine from ground up the truth and soundness of our notions about the nature and history of government in the United States.  Until we understand the Problem, no solutions will be in our sight. 

I hear with dismay folks blaming other folks for our situation, repeating the propaganda of the elite media and political machinery, whose purpose is as it has always been to keep us from focusing on the inherently criminal ruling class.  If the sole cause of our problem really is those people who like to get free things from government, we might as well quit, as all but perhaps one in a million among us are married for life to this sin; bucking Nature is always in vain.  If, on the other hand, one of the principal causes is a system that allows this sin a field of action, we may be able to do something about it.

Only if we manage the daunting task of clearing our view of the myriad of misconceptions the elites have erected in us to obstruct it, will we be in a position to rebuild the culture and practice of liberty and prosperity in this land.

Jacob Roginsky


On 8/3/2012 10:09 AM, Robert Sindelar wrote:

 

Dear Jacob,

 

Your comments below re: ruling vs. masses are absolutely correct. Practicality went out when rulers assembled and were grown to become tyrants over all others. We have come to that point in time Sir.

 

So, What are we going to do about it?

 

Many good men have tried, many good men sit in prisons across our land and off shore. They sit there only because the masses chickened out of holding up there responsibility to a JUST Cause.

 

What do you think friend?