Lincolnshire Voice

Thanks to Kenn d'Oudney of the Democracy Defined movement for the final part, including an interesting quote from Churchill. These 2 parts are a perfect accopaniment to the Laymans Guide to the English Constitution.

THE TRIAL BY JURY JUSTICE SYSTEM

II. CONSTITUTIONAL COMMON LAW

IN REGARD TO ‘JUDGES’.

It is an irrevocable principle of the traditional pan-European, English, Irish, Welsh, Scottish, German, French, Spanish, Italian, Australian, New Zealand, Canadian and the American People’s Common Law governing jurisprudence, and of Magna Carta (Article 24 of John’s Charter and 17 of Henry’s), that Trial shall be by Jury and at Trial by Jury no judge or other officer appointed by government shall preside in criminal cases or lawsuits in which the government is also an interested party (called pleas of the crown in the U.K.). In such cases, without the observance of this prohibition there can be neither Trial by Jury, nor legal trial of any type.

For the best of reasons, at common law Trial by Jury the convenors (who are now incorrectly named ‘judges’ or ‘justices’) have NO judicial function and are chosen by the people; i.e., elected:

“Nullus vice comes, constabularius, coronator, vel alii valivi nostri, teneant placita coronæ nostræ.” Translation: “No sheriff, constable, coroner, or other of our [monarch/government-appointed] bailiffs, shall hold pleas of our crown [Trial by Jury].”

— John’s Great Charter, Article 24. — Henry’s Great Charter, Article 17.

The emphasis on “our” is added because—as distinguished from any officials appointed to their positions by the government—locally-chosen, elected persons (including but not limited to bailiffs, stewards or sheriffs), could and can convene Trials by Jury. See more info in TRIAL BY JURY: Its History, True Purpose and Modern Relevance ISBN 9781902848723.

The reasons for this are simple and pure: Regarding convening officers (‘judges’) at trials, impartiality and integrity cannot be obtained (nor realistically even expected) from people who enforce the laws who are selected by those who also make and maintain the laws. At the common law of the land, whether in civil or criminal cases, all officers who convene trials are chosen (elected) by the people. At common law, convenors (justices; judges) are themselves subject to common law and are answerable to the common law tribunals of the people (i.e., Trial by Jury), and not protected by élite privilege or impeachable by government and legislature. See Book 4 of Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England, p. 413; and Introduction to Gilbert’s History of the Common Pleas, p. 2, note, & p. 4; etc.

Trial by Jury is so-named, for in democratic societies the trial of a citizen is by fellow citizens who comprise the Jury. Trial is not ‘trial-by-government’ which could never be fair where government is also one of the contesting parties. Judges themselves comprise a branch of government, and, they are in the pay of government. Police, prison service and above all, prosecutors and judges are employed to enforce governments’ laws. Such personnel should never be asked, nor relied on, to decide impartially whether laws are just, for they must fulfil their task or face the fury of the government, their employer.

For these reasons given, government and judiciary are incompetent to require the conviction or punishment of any person for any offence whatever.

Q. “When is a judge not a judge?”

A. “When ‘the judge’ is not a member of the jury.”

Until the Latin-derived word ‘juror’ was adopted, jurors were actually called the judges, in recognition of their rôle. “...the judges, for so the jury were called...” See p. 55 of Crabbe’s History of the English Law, etc. In Trial by Jury, the Foreman or woman of the jury is the principal presiding officer.

Whatever the judge’s motives, the judge is wrong not to inform jurors of their Right and Duty to do justice: e.g. State of Georgia v. Brailsford, a Supreme Court forfeiture trial, the facts having been ascertained, U.S. Chief Justice John Jay instructed jurors that it remained only for them to judge the law itself, saying:

“The Jury has the right to judge both the law as well as the fact in controversy.”

Today, as a juror, expect the judge to forbid you from judging on equity, fairness and justice. Instead, judges instruct jurors to “uphold the law” regardless; and not to allow conscience, their opinion of the law, or a defendant’s motives, to affect their decision. One can speculate WHY judges contravene the Constitution and civilised standards, and do not instruct jurors of their constitutional, legal and moral obligations: i.e., the Jurors’ Right and Duty to judge the justice of law enforcement; WHY judges perjuriously misinstruct jurors that they are ‘not permitted’ to judge the law; and WHY judges decide what evidence may be heard in court, ruling out evidence which exonerates the accused, and preventing juries from reviewing all evidence and deciding on its admissibility...

—disrespect for Citizens’ ability to make fair judgements ?

—the judge is the willing servant of antidemocratic, illegal oppressive government ?

—unwillingness to part with his or her power to prejudice the verdict and produce the outcome desired by the judge or by his or her political masters ?

The courts’ current illegal modus operandi is to facilitate the tyranny manifest in the judiciary’s enforcement of inequitable, apocryphal, money-motivated statutes and regulations, which, given the correct procedures of Constitutional Trial by Jury, citizen-jurors en masse would emphatically annul.

MOTIVE.

The motive behind, and explanation for, judges’ boundless treachery are the same today as they have always been, and they confirm that the indispensability of Trial by Jury is eternal: the judiciary is responsible, not to the People, but to the government; judges are dependent for careers, salaries and by impeachment, on the legislature: to remain judges, they must reliably enforce unjust legislation.

Judges regard themselves as bound to enforce the laws, even when doing so is inequitable and an act of extreme injustice; a crime per se. Once a law has been passed and interpreted for enforcement by the courts, then, unlike jurors, in the routine of court cases judges are not permitted to dispute or judge the justice of law and its enforcement. What is more, feloniously compounding their abdication of responsibility and abandonment of honesty, judges actively disallow the presentation of evidence or defences which exonerate the accused, if the evidence “disputes the legality of the law.”*

*See THE REPORT ISBN 9781902848204.

For gain, courtroom lawyers likewise participate in perverted proceedings, perjuriously consenting to this odious denial of the duty to find The Whole Truth. They entrench their malfeasance by also tacitly concealing from Juries all their proper Duties in Constitutional Trial by Jury; including Jurors’ Rights and Duty to judge the law; to acquit in the absence of malicious motivation; and to find the Verdict according to the Juror’s conscience.

To allow judges, these compromised unconscionable treasonous humans, to dictate the law, utterly surrenders all the liberties, rights, property and money of the People to the arbitrary will of renegade politicians. Any person who would propose or support such a system of enslavement and subjection of the People suffers from lack of education and knowledge of human behaviour and political history—or from acute antidemocratic mens rea (criminal intent).

ENFORCEMENT OF INJUSTICE

BY GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL

IS AN ILLEGAL PUNISHABLE ACT.

At all times, every adult has the moral responsibility to suppress injustice. Every act of injustice is a common law crime, whether committed by private citizens or by the state. Jurors and government employees alike are accountable. See ratified Principles, U.N. Resolution, 12-10-1946:

PRINCIPLE I: “Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible and liable to punishment.”

PRINCIPLE II: “The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not release the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law.”

PRINCIPLE III: “The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law.”

PRINCIPLE IV: “The fact that a person acted pursuant to the order of his government or a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.”

Whether by participation in the enforcement of arbitrary legislation or from the following of direct orders, being party to the execution of injustice makes the person involved liable to punishment for a criminal offence under common law (also cf. Crime Against Humanity; the Nuremberg Trials’ Findings, etc.).

In the Trial by Jury context, the moral choice quoted above is ALWAYS “possible;” it is definitively obligatory: the “choice” is mandatory. De jure, under pain of penalisation, all those involved at every stage of the creation, maintenance and enforcement of law, including jurors, must make the moral choice and judge the law, and accordingly take the appropriate action or make the apposite decision.

As the ‘one world government’, ‘new world order’ dictatorship answerable to no one, grows and spreads its malignance amongst the peoples of the planet, RESTORATION and UNIVERSAL ADOPTION of Constitutional Common Law Trial by Jury becomes exigent and perhaps inevitable. The question is whether Restoration can be effected by representative political means with a cognisant, united population in ardent support (as at Runnymede on the Fifteenth of June, 1215) or must it be re-installed by tumult and violence? Restoration is due (overdue) and where it is not actively supported by individual politicians, i.e., it being passively or actively obstructed, that will result in those treasonous violators of Constitution and Common Law being brought to account in due course.

III. CRIME, HOLOCAUST AND WAR.

Citizen-Juries educated and instructed to judge on the justice of law and its enforcement, can be relied upon to protect people from the state, when the state breaches correct behaviour in attempting to enforce injustices. It is for this reason that those who stand to gain money and/or power from tyranny by the imposition of unjust ‘laws’, regard the genuine Trial by Jury as an obstacle to be undermined and destroyed. Untrustworthy at best, of outright criminal intent at worst, are those who, instead of restoring Common Law Trial by Jury to its true form and ascendance, would discard it altogether.

With Trial by Jury holding sway, laws count for naught unless they be just. Thus, the People are served, not ruled, by governments. Such government then cannot but embody truly wholesome ideals and civilised aspirations. This type of government attracts, and is comprised of, people representing the citizens’ interests; and oppressing none; and no tyrant can attain power. Such is democracy*.

*Etymology: demos, the people; kratos, sovereignty, power; kratein, to rule.

Hellenic Greece of the Constitution of government by Trial by Jury received from the Athenians the defining epithet, Democracy (demokratia). Democracy means the people rule through Trial by Jury. Trial by Jury defines democracy, sine qua non.

See further semasiological information in DEMOCRACY DEFINED ISBN 9781902848228.

When the fact of all the people having equal and ultimate control over the enforcement of laws in the Trial by Jury is a firmly established social reality, it makes the passing of tyrannical legislation by national assemblies a fruitless exercise predestined to failure. Tyranny is nipped in the bud.

The immediate result of RESTORATION of the Constitutional Trial by Jury Justice System would be the curtailment of wayward politicians’ and their servitors, the judges’, undue powers; and the thorough reversal of their pernicious acts by which World Civilisation is currently being criminally dismantled to establish the ‘new world order’ dictatorship. This latter is comprised of a tiny malevolent clique of the private-owners of the world’s ‘Central Banks’ (the B of E; the Federal Reserve, etc.); Rothschilds; Rockefellers (Chase Manhattan); Bushes (Brown Brothers Harriman); et al.

At the behest of juries of ordinary citizens, the state is constrained into enforcing only just principles and democratic attitudes which accord with the People’s judgement in Trials by Jury, such as those reflecting common law values: fraternity, liberty, egalitarianism, progress and justice. Common Law Principles of Random Selection and Unanimity to pronounce ‘guilt’, combine to ensure all equitable views in society are represented, minorities are protected, and only laws uniformly deemed just, valid and equitable according to the conscience of ordinary men and women, are enforced.

By the diligent upholding of this Constitution, all tyranny is pre-empted. Not only are bureaucratic, judicial and fiscal injustices eliminated, but tyrants, great and petty, are emasculated. This enforceable democratic control by the People, backed by the entire government apparatus of police, prison service and Armed Services, was constitutionally emplaced to extend equally over the historic and current ‘religious’ tyrannies, as to secular, which are suffered under man’s inhumanity to man.

Thus, Constitutional Democracies founded on the Common Law Trial by Jury respond to, but cannot initiate, aggression, including wars so-defined. If Trial by Jury had remained operating throughout the European nations, whence it originated, the Hohenzollern, Hitler and Stalin tyrannies would have been truncated, and the Holocaust and both World Wars averted.

CHURCHILL’S VIEW.

“The power of the Executive to cast a man into prison without formulating any charge known to the law, and particularly to deny him the judgement of his peers, is in the highest degree odious and is the foundation of all totalitarian government, whether Nazi or Communist.”

Sir Winston Churchill, Author, Chronicler, Historian, Philosopher, Nobel laureate for Literature; Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

“the judgement of pares or peers [social-equals],” judicium parium; is also known as Trial by Jury.

Telegram from Cairo to the U.K. Home Secretary on November the 21st, 1943. Emphases added.

The ordinary person, the mechanic, the writer, the worker, the businessman, the window-cleaner, the teacher, the shop assistant, is there as the Juror to protect the interests of the people (him or herself) from crime and unfairness, from whichever source it derives. Unless this common law Trial by Jury holds sway, the career politician comprises part of an ongoing élite which must inevitably then be the overlords of ordinary people. Majorities voting in the house will reflect interests of groups unfairly, at the expense of others. Tyranny must come to prevail. Without the authority of the Common Law Trial by Jury being the sole Justice System in force, only violence and revolution can stop a government bent on inflicting acts of injustice on the people.

If you do believe in God, then you will marvel at His sublime wisdom in providing the natural law’s simple, practical SECULAR means for ALL men and women everywhere to create and live in the definitive civilised state of Equal Justice: achieving it is the challenge facing humankind. We all may believe what we will; but the Universal Secular Paradigm of Justice, “Do unto others as you would they do unto you,” provides the Universal Juror with the means for ascertaining whether the act of the accused was for good, ill or neutral. With the Juror’s Duties to the fore of judging the evidence, the justice of the law, the gravity and nature of the act, etc., the case is tried.

The Juror is sovereign in Trial by Jury (Unanimity required). Within the civilised society...

The Jury Comprises the Supreme Legislature and Judicature.

THIS CASE RULING EXEMPLIFIES DEMOCRACY AT WORK:

“If the jury feels the law is unjust, we recognise the undisputed power of the jury to acquit even if its verdict is contrary to the law as given by the judge, and contrary to the evidence.”

“If the jury feels that the law under which the defendant is accused is unjust, or that exigent circumstances justified the actions of the accused, or for any reason which appeals to their logic or passion, the jury has the power to acquit, and the courts must abide by that decision.”

United States v. Moylan; U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, 1969, 417 F. 2d 1002.

Neither in Britain, the United States, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, nor in all of Continental Europe and elsewhere, have legislatures ever been invested by the People with authority to impair the powers, to change the oaths, or abridge the jurisdiction of jurors to govern government; nor to remove the universal Right of the accused to the Trial by Jury of peers for any charge or offence whatever, however serious or trivial.

Today, U.S. v Moylan is not exemplified by the modus operandi of courts here or abroad. At the behest of the largely covert manoeuvrings of the felonious implementers of the ‘new world order’, democracy has been overturned by miscreant politicians and judiciary, and the genuine Trial by Jury is no more (ref. the illegally denied Juror’s Duties definitive of Trial by Jury).

MAY ALL FELLOW CITIZENS BEWARE !

Trial-by-judge is the system which denies the common law Trial by Jury. Trial-by-judge is the National Socialist (NAZI), Stalinist, Soviet, fascist and communist system of judicial oppression, by which primitive tyranny thrives; massive injustices are routinely enforced on innocent people; and citizens are intentionally put into permanent fear and servitude.

Complacent, insouciant, ignorant, servile populations of Westerners, e.g. British, Americans, French, Germans, Italians, Spanish and other Europeans, New Zealanders, Canadians and Australians, have allowed antidemocratic politicians to strip them of their legal protections which are universal, inherent and inalienable: the Juror’s Rights and Duty and the Trial by Jury Justice System. People have permitted institutionalisation of despotic attitudes. Oppression has taken root and become widespread even in the former great bastions of democracy. Let us stop the rot forthwith and work ceaselessly until RESTORATION of Trial by Jury, humankind’s Model Justice System, is achieved.

In addition to the presidents, prime ministers and chief justices often quoted in their advocation of the superiority of Trial by Jury over all systems of justice and law enforcement, the following is further impartial appraisal of the Great Charter and Trial by Jury, and, by implication, of the U.S., Canadian and Australian Constitutions which also base their Justice System on the Trial by Jury. Legal historian and philosopher Sir James Mackintosh, a Scot, says of Magna Carta:

“To have produced it, to have preserved it, to have matured it, constitute the immortal claim of England on the esteem of Mankind. Her Bacons and Shakespeares, her Miltons and Newtons, with all the truth which they have revealed, and all the generous virtues which they have inspired, are of inferior value when compared with the subjection of men and their rulers to the principles of justice; if, indeed, it be not more true that these mighty spirits could not have been formed except under equal laws, nor roused to full activity without the influence of that spirit which the Great Charter breathed over their forefathers.”

Chapter Three of Mackintosh’s History of England. Emphasis added.

©The Author. Contents of Part 1 of this guide are comprised of extracts from essays and books by Kenn d’Oudney, TRIAL BY JURY: Its History, True Purpose and Modern Relevance ISBN 9781902848723, DEMOCRACY DEFINED ISBN 9781902848228, and legal-medical textbook THE REPORT, Cannabis: The Facts, Human Rights and the Law ISBN 9781902848204, from SRC Publishing, Ltd. If required, the contents of Part 1 may be reproduced in whole or part with the proviso that attribution be given to author, the books and SRC Publishing of London.