Image result for dr dans freedom forum

Help Educate America
Click on the following link to help educate America.
Donations are not tax deductible.

Keith Broaders
1230 N Street #510
Sacramento, California 95814
Phone (916) 399-4881

The Facts Remain

Comments from Joe

The fact that the words of Jesus ring true is the fact that drove people to defend the innocent against the criminals who called themselves The British. That happened in an organic way, as the working federation began to work as intended between 1776 and 1787.

The facts remain that the grand jury has never been a common law concept as its nature has been statutory.

Here is an explanation of the stark difference between a jury for the people and a false court:

http://www.americanantiquarian.org/proceedings/44539282.pdf

It is a long read and it has to do with a false court case involving a judge in Massachusetts who offered a story at the end of that paper. The story has to do with a formation of an organic jury, which would be the type of jury that works for the people, not the special interests, but for the people as a whole, all the people, everyone, excluding no one, not even the criminals.

So that offers some history as to why juries are formed. The idea of them, and the use of them, and it is a good start as to what the subject matter is in fact.

There are two very opposite sides in this struggle. Those who work to defend the innocent from the guilty are on one side, and those who work to defend the power criminals command as they destroy the innocent are on the other side.

It is that simple.

A Grand Jury according to the Bill of Rights can be understood in that light, for those on one side. Those on the other side will dismiss any notions of people defending the innocent as if that work can only be done by special people who just so happen to be devil worshipping criminals hiding behind false fronts, or color of law, as they perpetrate crimes including the crime of taking over governments, which can also be known as treason.

The wording is simple enough, despite the fact that James Madison wrote the words instead of George Mason writing the words, but that can be understood in context. James Madison was a false Federalist and George Mason was on the side of the people.

Despite James Madison having too much rat smelly stuff oozing out of his evil soul the words are still written in plain English:

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript...

The words may take some time to sink in, so repeating the words works to convey the accurate meaning.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript...

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury,

A Grand Jury presupposed that there are criminals infesting government for a place where the people are the government needs only trail by jury as anyone can accuse anyone of any crime and a trial by jury is then afforded to both the accuser and the accused when the people are the government.

The false accusers pay the costs of their false accusations, and that is a very good governing principle that deters false accusations.

Who says so?

The jury.

When?

In each case.

The Grand Jury presupposes that criminals infest government and government becomes organized crime and a Grand Jury is there to avoid this:

http://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/bsbhm2.html

If the people have to take up arms to regain their government, then that proves that trial by jury has been set aside, and there was no Grand Jury to afford to the people a means by which the criminals who took over government are offered a way to redeem themselves when they are caught with the hands in the cookie jar, or caught raping lady Liberty.

The people say, hey, you can't punish that member of the people, you don't have a Grand Jury presentment, and they mean, you can't punish anyone, including anyone in government.

Sorry.

That is how people defend the innocent from other people in or out of government without having to resort to falsehood and violence.

If someone wants to know what I think about God, or spiritualism, or religion, then they can ask. I can offer that I think everyone will pay for their mistakes in spades. Those who make the same mistakes over and over again will be those who pay more and more eventually, and that may or may not have anything to do with any other people.

Comments?

Views: 653

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

There are two very opposite sides in this struggle. Those who work to defend the innocent from the guilty are on one side, and those who work to defend the power criminals command as they destroy the innocent are on the other side.

 That overly simplistic as there exists at least one other side: Those who work to defend the innocent from the guilty but who disagree about particular issues. 

I provided the following, unrebutted claim:

The facts remain that the grand jury has never been a common law concept as its nature has been statutory.

Someone much smarter than I has done some good research here

The concept of the Grand Jury was expressed as early as 997

In 997 Ethelred enacted his Wantage Code, which provided:

Let twelve elder freemen, and the foreman with them, retire and swear upon the holy book which is given into their hands that they will not accuse any innocent person, nor screen any criminal.

Note how this is a statutory not common law creation

In 1166, during the rule of the Norman King Henry II. Under his rule the Assize of Clarendon was enacted. The Assize provided for an accusatory body of twelve men to prefer criminal charges against wrongdoers.

Again, statutory in nature.

While I can continue, it seems rather straightforward that the concept of a 'common law' Grand Jury needs some work. I am pleased therefor that some have renamed it to "People Grand Jury", although it is not clear to me how this relates to "We the People" unless it refers to the small group of like minded people who have gathered to petition the government for redress of grievances. But such a petition lacks much of any legal relevance.

Furthermore, there is no Constitutional requirement for a Grand Jury in State Courts, as I have explained. This has to do with State Rights and the rights of the Sovereign to conduct its own legal processes, as long as they do not violate "due process" under the 14th. And as shown, there is no good argument that a Grand Jury is necessary for "due process".

I hope this helps everybody.....by Hon Harry Fogle.... The Trial of Jesus. 

 http://www.1215.org/lawnotes/lawnotes/jesustrial.htm

while I don't think it will raise any hairs on Naive's body, or make him want to stop pause at the apathy of men, it might touch others.

Naive, you never did answer this question from another thread. "I care about God's Law. After all it is the Supreme Law". Right?

Naive, you never did answer this question from another thread. "I care about God's Law. After all it is the Supreme Law". Right?

 You are now confusing two different concepts. One involves a religious belief as to how we should act, the other involves the law according to our Nation. For example, it is not contrary to law to have sex outside of wedlock, however in many religions, this is argued to be in violation of some form of 'Supreme Law'.  Now we also know that for example Jesus, has clearly outlined that there exists a religious law, as well as a civil law, "Render onto Caesar", properly recognizing, just like for example Sharia law, that the laws of the nation in which we reside need to be abided with.

I am equally concerned about apathy of men, and women for that matter, however I do not believe that actions just for action sake is a wise path to pursue. The foundation of "Common Law" is so flawed that I am not surprised that no progress is being made in getting anyone to take the movement seriously. It does show that there are a handful of people who are willing to take action when they believe that their Nation is being destroyed, and while one may disagree with their motivations, one cannot object to citizens pursuing policy and law changes through the proper Constitutional channels.

Pretending to be a 'lawful Grand Jury' with the powers to not only indict but more, is rather wishful thinking and in many states against the law. While one may refuse to recognize law out of principle, the State similarly has the right to ignore your objections and bring you before a jury of your peers to answer for your trespasses.

"The foundation of "Common Law" is so flawed that I am not surprised that no progress is being made in getting anyone to take the movement seriously."  - NBC

Really Native? A movement? That's what you're going to call it? That's the word you're going with? Movement? Tell us oh wise one-Kanobi. What would you're solution be? If not Common good, Common treatment, Common goals, Common Law, then what?

How would you solve the obvious problems we face today in America? What is your vision for the "New World Order" ?

If everybody notices Naïve did NOT answer my question... His words mirror almost every "case opinion" I have EVER read.

The second and third paragraphs speak about common law grand juries... That was NOT in my question.

The first paragraph talked about a number of laws.

If this isn't a judicial doctorate he ought to be. Probably the clerk. I have NEVER seen him post one case he has ever won or even put forth in nor any tyrannical terror he is suffering by the DOMESTIC ENEMIES running our country. 

Today is Sunday and I would strongly suggest Naïve go learn about the Supreme Law called the Laws of Nature and Nature's God. And while your there check out the part that says "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

This is foolish and NON constructive time spent. I am in overload with my cases of abuse and murder. I need proof readers and input with writing all these motions, pleadings, WRITS, RICO claims I need to file to the Federal Courts and then where will that get me????

This thieving lawyer has recently admitted on court record he has known my Dad didn't handle his finances for 10 YEARS but the atty kept arguing and writing my Dad was doing it his self...You CAN NOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS.... So who was handling Dad's finances and why is there $850,000 missing out of the estate? Was it James, Fansler or BOTH? They block me of ALL proof of accounting when I request.

Someone has CANCELLED out THE MILLER LIVING TRUST that was on the accounts in many financial institutions and now the BANKS are in trouble. I am the successor. Nobody has the power to do that but the trustee and the thieving lawyer has just admitted Dad was NOT handling his financial affairs so who CANCELLED it???? The guardian does NOT have the power to do that. This is undue influence by anybody's standard and why they want me gone.   

My heart can't take much more as most of you already know. Now where  are the people who want to get to work and do something productive? 

Oh by the way can anybody help me find a Provost Marshall close to Columbus Ohio or is the closest one in Dayton and who would that be ???

Thanks

Why do you need a provost marshall? He deals with military jurisdiction.

I would start with the US Office of the Provost Marshal General

If you are the victim of a crime or have information regarding a crime of U.S. Army  interest, immediately contact the nearest Military Police Station or law enforcement agency.

To report a felony crime the following toll-free telephone number is available  24/7 call 1-844-ARMY-CID (844-276-9243) or contact your nearest CID Office or  email CID at: usarmy.belvoir.usacidc.mail.crime-tips@mail.mil

I am sorry that you are running into real objections

If everybody notices Naïve did NOT answer my question... His words mirror almost every "case opinion" I have EVER read.

Well that should tell you that I am on to something. Good luck my friend. Every time you speak you claim more money is missing. Fascinating.

You said..."Every time you speak you claim more money is missing"

yes every time the thieving lawyer who manipulated a mentally impaired man to steal from him turns in his reports the theft seems to increase. Gosh shocking right? Who would expect that from an attorney? http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2014/10/10/lawyer_Kor...

Whoops that just dropped out of the sky!!!! I didn't do that your honor!!!!

Seems when robbers get away with it once they seldom stop. When has anybody heard of a one stop robber? Did the government stop planning how to turn us into slave debtors and property to steal from? 

When they learn there is no Superior Standard of Authority they have to answer to it will go on and on and on just like the energizer bunny till they meet the Supreme Law giver. That will be a really HOT day.....

It never works to have foxes policing foxes and then wonder why more  chickens are missing......

or because GAY foxes breed LESS foxes the chickens might be REALLY happy. Eventually the ALL the Foxes will DIE OUT!!!!!

Lucky chickens. course if all else fails there is always castration.

sorry that should say "GAY foxes breed NO foxes" but in this day and age who knows since we live in an age where 2 + 2 = 5........

It never works to have foxes policing foxes and then wonder why more  chickens are missing......

A good point, but has money really gone missing? I am not sure given what I have seen so far.

At the moment, you are facing more serious issues, involving several charges. I hope that you find a way to get the charges reduced or dropped.

RSS

© 2020   Created by Online Professor.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service