Thursday, November 10, 2011


Soft on crime.

Hard on crime.

Which side to take?

Prosecutors. Persecutors.

Vengeance is mine says the Lord.

Who is correct?

Who has the right?

Who has the power?

Who should have the power?

Our judicial system is broken. Prosecutors take all "crime" as an affront to themselves. It becomes personal. The prosecutor becomes the first protector, cutting notches on his grips for every person convicted. This behavior is sanctioned by the people who want safety, security, protection from the bad guys. And so prosecutors become persecutors, using flawed logic, flawed evidence, and outright lies to gain wins. Exculpatory evidence is hidden and innocent people are destroyed.

Our grand jury system is broken. The grand jury is supposed to be the first defense of the person to be indicted, not the first offense of the all powerful state against the little guy. This needs to change. A person is claimed to have no "constitutional" rights in the face of a grand jury. WRONG! Rights are given by God and are inalienable. The grand juries need change, they need to be charged with protecting the people who they now destroy.

The purpose of our legal system is/was to be to provide justice. Justice requires truth. Justice requires honor. Justice requires integrity. Things all missing greatly in today's world. Is it justice when evidence is withheld that would prove innocence? Is it justice when the system refuses to allow checks of things like DNA that might prove the innocence of someone screwed over by the system? The Bible teaches that we should not expect justice here on Earth. Why not? Man can improve.

So how does one fix something so broken? How does one change for the better when one recognizes that humans fail at all things Godly?

Juries must be taught about their power to nullify the law.

Judges must be put in their place as servants of, rather than masters of, society. Judges must be restricted to following the law or to face removal. Judges must be required to leave their personal prejudices at home. In my system, a person who has ever chosen a political party would not be allowed to be a judge because that person has show a partiality that may cloud his performance in obtaining justice.

I believe one step is to eliminate "professional" prosecutors. My system would require all practicing attorneys to participate in an computer managed random selection process fo assigning prosecutors and defenders in every case.

I propose that all evidence collected by the police be sent to a private lab, not a state-controlled lab. AND that all reports be supplied in duplicate to both the prosecutor and the defender. Any evidence not evaluated by private independent evaluators is not admissible for any reason.

Is our battle about fighting crime or is it about obtaining justice for all? You decide.


The Final Say

In the US, the people are brainwashed to believe that the courts have the final say in all things legal. And the people are brainwashed to believe that the finalist of all is the supreme court. Commonly one hears, "I'm gonna take this all the way to the supreme court if I have to!!"

But everyone is wrong. And the answer about who holds the power has been well known for hundreds of years.

Our schools, especially our legal training institutes, have failed to properly teach the people about the true power holders in the U.S.

A simple quote from the greatest jurist is in order:

For, whenever a question arises between the society at large and any magistrate vested with powers originally delegated by that society, it must be decided by the voice of the society itself: there is not upon earth any other tribunal to resort to.

Sir William Blackstone, Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, Book I, Chp3, pg.205/6

We the People, the society, are and always have been superior in authority to every court, including the "supreme court". What is wrong is that We the People have been brainwashed into letting the courts usurp our authority. It is time to turn the tables. If We the People, even through a simple opinion poll, indicate our displeasure with some law at a level above 50%, the We the People have decided according to OUR will. And there is no tribunal on earth with the power to legitimately overturn our will.


Internet Autism

New term. Internet Autism - inability to discriminate among inputs for the internet due to a lack of critical thinking skills.