slug.com slug.com
0 0

"...and have a proper debate..."

"...and have a proper debate..."

"...and have a proper debate..."

"...and have a proper debate..."

Counter brain-washing? Why is this not easy to see, said someone who went looking?

Private Prosecutors go to other people with inculpatory evidence that warrants a court date so as to save the lives of countless past, present, and future victims of very serious crimes against humanity. The only way the law works is in freedom and liberty, it does not work in tyranny, despotism, Empire, etc. People can't dictate to each other, one way, and expect anything but dictatorship.

"...and have a proper debate..."

"...and have a proper debate..."

"...and have a proper debate..."

"...and have a proper debate..."

Private Prosecutors DEBATE the merits of the case, the inculpatory evidence, to a member of an Independent Grand Jury, and if the Private Prosecutor Dictates to the Independent Grand Jury member orders that must be obeyed without question while the Independent Grand Jury member Dictates to the Private Prosecutor orders that must be obeyed without question, what do you think will happen to the LAW POWER that is in place to defend the innocent from the guilty?

OK, so suppose in that single, individual, one magic moment, BOTH the Private Prosecutor and the Independent Grand Jury member have a proper debate concerning the inculpatory evidence that warrants by probable cause the formation of an Independent Grand Jury to then wield all lawful, all legal, all moral, all defensive, jurisdiction and power, including subpoena power, to investigate the cause to act in defense. If every one of the 25 or so members of the formed Independent Grand Jury dictate to each other orders that must be obeyed without question, rather than have a proper debate, will the guilty have more or less time to add to the amount of power they extract from their victims?

Time A: Private Prosecutors walks in on clear evidence that warrants a cause to act in defense, use your imagination.

Time B: Private Prosecutor is powerless at Time B to effectively defend the innocent victim being consumed by the guilty criminal all alone with the very limited amount of defensive power at the fingertips of the Private Prosecutor at Time B.

So, the solution is for the defender to start dictating to other people orders that must be obeyed without question so as then to increase the defensive power at the fingertips of the Private Prosecutor? Are you seeing clearly the purpose of Law versus the purpose of Crime? Law gives notice (when the situation warrants notice given) and then Law executes defensive actions after giving notice (a derivative of "innocent" until proven guilty).

“Stop, stop ripping the arms off of those children in that playground!”

No. That is a clear example of a crime in progress where the perpetrator confesses guilt as the perpetrator goes from child to child ripping of yet another arm, so who on Earth is to say that the defender in that case is not empowered to stop that guilty criminal in his tracks? There is no warrant for a warning in specific, unique, cases. A warning gives the criminal time to move from Victim A to Victim B. What happens after the dust clears during that dynamic situation?

What if the individual ripping arms off children in the playground is perfectly justified to do so, as it was not clear to the observer that – according to the one ripping off the arms of children – failing to rip off these children’s arms would result in total annihilation of all life on Planet Earth: or some other claimed justification, such as My Dog Sam told me that this had to be done or else, or Generalissimo Sam Washington from Washington D.C. ordered this to be done, to be done without question?

“Stop, stop ripping the arms off of those children in that playground!”

Now suppose an argument took place as one of the people in debate continues to rip arms off the children in the playground. The other one in debate attempts, vainly, to convince the one ripping off arms to stop, because clearly there must be at least one other option to “Save the World” other than moving from child to child ripping off their arms, a least that is the Story told by at least one of the people debating the merits of Just Following Orders Without Question.

What next? The one ripping off children’s arms let’s his debate partner know that there is a list of playgrounds full of children that the Crusader Following Orders Without Question is ordered to go to, post haste, to rip off their arms too.

Does it dawn on you that – as a rule – criminals do not obey the law, but some of them obey criminal orders without question, without debate, because in the situation above there are lawful concepts that ought to apply:

The Conviction Factory, The Collapse of America's Criminal Courts, by Roger Roots
Page 40
Private Prosecutors
"For decades before and after the Revolution, the adjudication of criminals in America was governed primarily by the rule of private prosecution: (1) victims of serious crimes approached a community grand jury, (2) the grand jury investigated the matter and issued an indictment only if it concluded that a crime should be charged, and (3) the victim himself or his representative (generally an attorney but sometimes a state attorney general) prosecuted the defendant before a petit jury of twelve men. Criminal actions were only a step away from civil actions - the only material difference being that criminal claims ostensibly involved an interest of the public at large as well as the victim. Private prosecutors acted under authority of the people and in the name of the state - but for their own vindication. The very term "prosecutor" meant criminal plaintiff and implied a private person. A government prosecutor was referred to as an attorney general and was a rare phenomenon in criminal cases at the time of the nation's founding. When a private individual prosecuted an action in the name of the state, the attorney general was required to allow the prosecutor to use his name - even if the attorney general himself did not approve of the action.
Private prosecution meant that criminal cases were for the most part limited by the need of crime victims for vindication. Crime victims held the keys to a potential defendant's fate and often negotiated the settlement of criminal cases. After a case was initiated in the name of the people, however, private prosecutors were prohibited from withdrawing the action pursuant to private agreement with the defendant. Court intervention was occasionally required to compel injured crime victims to appear against offenders in court and "not to make bargains to allow [defendants] to escape conviction, if they...repair the injury."

Page 42
Law Enforcement as a Universal Duty
"Law enforcement in the Founders' time was a duty of every citizen. Citizens were expected to be armed and equipped to chase suspects on foot, on horse, or with wagon whenever summoned. And when called upon to enforce the laws of the state, citizens were to respond "not faintly and with lagging steps, but honestly and bravely and with whatever implements and facilities [were] convenient and at hand. Any person could act in the capacity of a constable without being one, and when summoned by a law enforcement officer, a private person became a temporary member of the police department. The law also presumed that any person acting in his public capacity as an officer was rightfully appointed."

Englishman’s Right: A Dialogue between a Barrister at Law and a Juryman, John Hawles, 1763
“Qui non prohibet cum potest, jubet: That man abets an evil, who prevents it not, when it is in his power. Nec caret scrupulo sosietatis occultae qui evidenter facinori definit obviare: nor can he escape the suspicion of being a secret accomplice, who evidently declines the prevention of an atrocious crime.”

Private Prosecutor debates the merit of the case (Son of Sam moving to the next playground) with a member of an Independent Grand Jury, perhaps the Private Prosecutor filmed his debate with the Son of Sam who was Just Following Orders Without Question.

Does the Independent Grand Jury member listen to the inculpatory evidence and form an Independent Grand Jury to investigate the matter and potentially issue a Court Date in a Court of Law to bring the accused (presumed to be innocent) Son of Sam before The People who are represented by Independent Trial Jurors for adjudication of the matter as the Private Prosecutor explains to the Trial Jurors precisely why the Son of Sam ought not go to the next Playground to rip the arms off all the children at the next Playground on the List given to the Son of Sam by Sam at Empire Center Command?

Are you following along?

In debate during the deliberation to write up a presentment to be given to the Son of Sam it becomes clear to at least one of the Independent Grand Jurors that perhaps the evidence at hand suggests the need to investigate Sam at Empire Center Command?

Josf-Kelley 8 Sep 20
Share
You must be a member of this group before commenting. Join Group

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

Recent Visitors 2

Photos 19 More

Posted by Josf-KelleyWanted for Treason That is all for lack of intelligence and moral conscience.

Posted by Josf-KelleyBorrowed from another IDW post is the pictured meme.

Posted by Josf-KelleyReal Reality A few people have purchased the exclusive power to add zeros to their Bank account balance, and they accomplish this feat by borrowing their spending from anyone who can produce ...

Posted by HeresiarchWhy you should close Social Media accounts you no longer use. (I shut down my LinkedIn account immediately)

Posted by HeresiarchI taught my daughter to shoot at ten years old. Now she's passing on the lessons she learned.

Posted by HeresiarchIt's taken us years to rehabilitate the soil on our Better Than Organic farmlet.

Posted by Josf-KelleyThat is a complex process viewed simplistically in two directions that appear, in simple form, to be opposites.

Posted by Josf-KelleyThe level of brainwashing or mind control, or spirit control, or body control, or behavior control is demonstrably on a sub-conscious level and it runs very deep.

Posted by HeresiarchHow do you sacrifice children?

Posted by HeresiarchHow's that Police State workin' out for y'all?

Posted by Josf-KelleyFrom a source:

Posted by Josf-KelleyTrump says Pence can reject criminal votes.

Posted by Josf-KelleyFrom another IDW post: Roadmap to re-inauguration:

Posted by Josf-KelleyAt a Pennsylvania State Hearing, widespread voter and election fraud is reported by witness testimony.

Posted by Josf-KelleyThe following link is immediately censored from Facebook, as I press the enter button, a warning page loads.

Posted by Josf-KelleyI was banished (for speaking the truth to power) from Culture War (IDW topics) and occasionally I am presented with posts in my feed that lead to that exclusive group, so I can't enter, and a I can't ...

  • Top tags#government #USA #rights #video #world #truth #money #crime #evidence #laws #reason #freedom #evil #children #justice #god #death #TheTruth #society #vote #liberty #federal #moral #media #Police #community #hope #violence #Constitution #hell #crimes #biden #book #military #earth #fear #politics #murder #created #Present #humanity #Congress #democrats #liberal #population #slavery #China #IDW #nation #politicians ...

    Members 37Top

    Moderator