In order to continue providing relevant content,
the Constitution Club needs the financial support of its membership. 
A $5.00 voluntary monthly contribution is requested.

Here's another update: Wednesday, Oct 15th, 2014;

THIS IS A LETTER TO THE DIXIE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
REPORTING A CRIME BECOMES A CRIME IN DIXIE COUNTY!
Terry George Trussell is an outstanding member of the Dixie County Community with a record of positively contributing to the community in many ways. Additionally, he is an Army veteran, a courageous Patriot, a loving husband and father, as well as a retired business person. He loves his country and his community deeply. He is now being severely punished for doing the duty he was asked to do by his county government as the Foreman of the Dixie County Grand Jury.
1. In April of this year, Terry was asked to serve as a grand juror for Dixie County, was sworn in, and selected to be the Foreman of the Grand Jury.
2. Terry read the Florida rules for grand juries and the Florida Grand Jury Handbook. He understood his duties as Grand Jury Foreman.
3. As Foreman, Terry had a sworn duty to bring any criminal complaints he became aware of to the attention of the Grand Jury in Dixie County.
4. Terry learned about alleged criminal behavior of Dixie County Public Officers and State officials regarding the deployment of Common Core curriculum into the public schools, where after money was paid, the agreement was made to change the curriculum before the new curriculum was published. Terry brought before the Grand Jury this complaint of official wrongdoing (bribery) associated with the adoption of the Common Core curriculum.
5. In the process of bringing the complaint in front of the Grand
Jury, 3rd Circuit Court State Attorney Jeffrey Siegmeister breached multiple Florida statutes by interfering with the official work of the Foreman and manipulating the Jury, thereby causing the Jury to become tainted.
6. Terry documented the events and put the evidence in the form of a Bill of Information into the public record and also gave a letter to Judge Munkittrick, the presiding judge who empaneled the Grand Jury.
7. As Grand Jury Foreman, Terry now faced a difficult problem: he is duty bound to bring forward two criminal complaints, one on Common Core curriculum and the other on Jeffrey Siegmeister’s unlawful and illegal behavior. However, the sitting Grand Jury was already tainted by Siegmeister’s actions. Terry knew that Florida is a Common Law state, so he set up a meeting with We the People of Dixie County to ask if they wanted to reestablish their Constitutionally-guaranteed Common Law Grand Jury. The People voted yes to move forward.
8. The Common Law Grand Jury was renamed The People’s Grand Jury Under Common Law in Dixie County and convened to consider the two criminal complaints. They handed down two True Bills of Presentment, which meant that they believed enough evidence existed to require investigation into both issues. The two True Bills were entered into the public record.
9. Through interviews with members of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE), it became clear that Terry, because he did his duty as Grand Jury Foreman, was now under attack by the judicial system and FDLE in a systematic effort to engineer a cover-up of Siegmeister’s alleged crimes. In other words, simply because he did his duty and the Grand Jury voted two True Bills of Presentment, he was being charged with 10 felonies for “simulating a legal process,” the possible penalties if convicted of 70 years in jail. In fact, Terry did nothing but what was his sworn duty to do. The evidence clearly shows he DID NOT simulate a legal process.
10. On September 2nd, Terry was arrested and jailed based on a fatally flawed affidavit. Judge Hankinson’s then issued an order, and warrant for the arrest of TERRY GEORGE TRUSSELL. A Void Judgment True Bill was drafted and filing was attempted in both Dixie County Court Clerk Office as well as with the Court Clerk in Perry (seat of the Circuit Court where Judge Hankinson is assigned), both clerks refused to file these important legal papers in terry’s defense. Additionally, it was discovered that the Court Clerk in Dixie County, Dana Johnson, removed and altered, or had removed and altered, official paperwork that Terry had filed previously into the public record.
11. This past Thursday, October 9th, Terry was prepared and present for his 10:00 AM arraignment at the Dixie Court House when at about 9:30 AM, the Deputy Sheriff delivered a 3-page document to Terry and told him the Judge stated if Terry wanted to speak at his own arraignment, he would be required to sign the document. Terry knew if he signed this document, he would be giving up his Constitutionally-protected right to a trial by a jury of his peers. He, therefore, declined to sign it.
12. In the courtroom at 10:00 AM, Judge Hankinson asked “Is Terry George Trussell here, and if yes, please step forward.” Terry was sitting in the courtroom, and he stood up in a clear voice and said “I am here to speak on this matter.” The Judge responded with a question “Are you Terry George Trussell?” As Terry began to respond, the Judge began speaking over Terry and, once again, asked “Is Terry George Trussell here?” Once again, Terry responded affirmatively. The Judge ignored Terry’s response a second time. Finally, the Judge asked once again with which Terry responded “For the record, I am here to speak on that matter.” The Judge then said, “Let the record show that Terry George Trussell has not appeared,” and ordered his arrest on Failure to Appear while also suspending his bond. Terry then said in a very clear and loud voice, “I object! I am here.” The Sheriff Deputies walked over and took Terry by his arms out of the courtroom, handcuffed him, and took him to jail. There are 26 signed, sworn, and notarized affidavits from people who witnessed the events in Judge Hankinson’s courtroom that day. You may click on this link to hear an audio file of these court proceedings at Terry’s arraignment.
13. According to the Florida Grand Jury Handbook provided at FloridaSupremeCourt.org, a Grand Jury Foreman has complete immunity for his actions except in the case he breached the rights of a witness. Because there were no witnesses, brought before the Jury, Terry George Trussell maintained his immunity.
The evidence in this case is clear: if you report a crime by a government official in Dixie County, you will be prosecuted as a criminal. Every action Terry took was based on the Constitution for the united States, the US Supreme Court decision in the case of US v Williams (1992) and as well as the Florida Grand Jury Instructions and the Florida Grand Jury handbook.
Terry is now suffering the loss of his Constitutionally-protected rights for doing his duty. The Dixie County judicial system is working hard to cover up the alleged criminal behavior of Jeffery A. Siegmeister, Judge Munkitrick as well as Dana Johnson. They are instead prosecuting Terry George Trussell on phony charges.
I believe the critical question is: Does the Constitution still apply in Dixie County?
WILL YOU AS THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ALLOW TO STAND UNCONSTITUTIONAL BEHAVIOR AND LACK OF DUE PROCESS BY JUDICIAL OFFICIALS (FROM OUTSIDE OF DIXIE COUNTY) IN OUR DIXIE COUNTY COURTROOM ?
Once you listen to the judges own words, it becomes clear he had no interest in dispensing justice during Terry’s arraignment. His mission was to punish a person who had the courage to report criminal behavior by a corrupt State Attorney. Please don’t forget that Florida Statutes say clearly that the Grand Jury Foreman has complete immunity for his actions with only one exception, breaching the rights of a witness. The reason the foreman has immunity is to protect him from the retribution by those in power.
Because of separation of powers, you as Dixie County commissioners can not address the corruption that has surfaced in the court directly, but you can begin the work of cleaning it up by simply recognizing the fully Constitutional People’s Grand Jury Under Common Law in Dixie County. It is The People’s Grand Jury Under Common Law in Dixie County that has handed down the two True Bills that Terry is now being punished for.
WILL YOU TAKE THE ACTIONS NECESSARY TO RESTORE JUSTICE TO YOUR DIXIE COUNTY JUSTICE SYSTEM BY SIMPLY VOTING TO SUPPORT YOUR DIXIE COUNTY PEOPLE'S GRAND JURY?
If you do so vote, the PGJ will investigate the alleged criminal activity that occurred during Terry’s arraignment and insure that Terry and ALL the People in Dixie County do receive Due Process of Law.

Views: 669

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

:-) Will do my best.

Well said Bob.

How's that?

When my words are twisted the evidence exists and all one has to do to find the twister is follow the falsehood back to the source.

Example:

I am starting to understand Joe's position which appears to be that history should have been rewritten to more properly reflect what Joe believes to be a proper governance.

That is called libel as far as I am concerned but the libeler offers to me an opportunity to expose libelers.

I have yet to express my position. I can express my position succinctly as such:

Power produced into oversupply reduces the price of power while purchasing power increases because power reduces the cost of production.

If I offer words relevant to a case, then the position is not mine per se, as the libeler claims.

Example:

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/1/236/

I cut and pasted from that source earlier. Focus from me is on the Grand Jury Foreman witnessing a criminal, first hand, while the criminal perpetrated jury tampering.

Focus on my character, my opinion, is not my interest.

When someone turns, twists, the focus offered from me, as I focus interest on the crime witnessed by the Grand Jury Foreman, to me, instead of focusing interest on the crime witnessed by the Grand Jury Foreman, is cause for me to offer a possible explanation for such behavior, absent a confession.

What is the payoff for twisting the focus of attention offered by me, which is the focus of attention on the Grand Jury Foreman witnessing a criminal perpetrating the crime of jury tampering, what is the payoff for twisting that focus unto me personally?

Without a confession I can offer my guess as to what the payoff might be for the one who twists focus of attention from the Grand Jury Foreman witnessing a criminal perpetrating the crime of raping lady Liberty from that to me personally.

Focus on my character, my opinion, is not my interest.

Your character is of limited interest to me my friend.  Which is why I focus on your apparently contradicting positions.

I am also pleased to here that you have concluded that the Grand Jury foreman witnessed a criminal perpetrating the crime of raping lady Liberty. 

Of course, this runs against principles of due process, innocent till proven guilty and presumes facts in evidence which do not exist.

Of course, we may never hear from you what you mean by the crime of raping liberty, which allows you to continue making meaningless generalizations which lack specificity in fact.

You can read all about these so called crimes in Terry's letter to the judge, which he unfortunately made public, rather than following the more proper grand jury proceedings which would have allowed due process to be followed.

As to your belief that Terry witnessed crimes of Jury tampering, that is something which you seem to have taken at face value. And yet, what specific actions were tampering with the jury, when the statutes themselves allow and require the prosecutor to provide legal advice to said grand jury?

If you want to claim criminal behavior then you surely should be able to outline in detail which crimes were committed?

As far as I can tell, the prosecutor made fun of the foreperson when he reported 'criminal behavior' by common core proponents. From Terry's report, it sounds that his fellow grand jurors were not very impressed either, and for good reasons. Which is why they apparently did not find a true bill.

So let's presume for the moment that Terry did witness a 'crime', how does this excuse his subsequent actions? Does the end justify the means? 

If I offer words relevant to a case, then the position is not mine per se, as the libeler claims.

So your claims are not yours per se and the reader should 'read between the lines' as to what Joe believes and what Joe is just stating without any conviction one way or the other?

Fascinating my dear friend and I do apologize for having mistaken your words are representing your opinion or beliefs.

If I offer words relevant to a case, then the position is not mine per se, as the libeler claims.

Example:

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/1/236/

Yes, an interesting case with limited relevance to the topic at hand which is the incorporation of the Grand Jury clause, or the concept of 'common law' and the Grand Jury, or the relevance of a jury to a person's due diligence.

The case has been cited by few, indicating that it has no real impact on the jurisprudence, however it does outline some problems with the claim that a grand jury is important for due process

As a consequence, neither in this country nor in England has the suspect under investigation by the grand jury ever been thought to have a right to testify or to have exculpatory evidence presented

US v Williams citing Respublica

In the world of the sociopaths, the psychopaths, and the sycophants who so gladly help cover up the crimes of the sociopaths and the psychopaths their edicts constitute absolute law to be obeyed without question.

I get that.

No need to repeat it in all the forms those lies can be offered, or enforced criminally, not on my account. Enough if that is enough for me, certainly too much as far as I can concerned.

In the words I know as common law there is the following understanding expressed in words:

It is a matter well known, and well understood, that by the laws of our country, every question which affects a man's life, reputation, or property, must be tried by twelve of his peers; and that their unanimous verdict is, alone, competent to determine the fact in issue.

In the world of the sociopaths, the psychopaths, and the sycophants who so gladly help cover up the crimes of the sociopaths and the psychopaths their edicts constitute absolute law to be obeyed without question.

There you go again with your ad hominems. Good work my friend. But really, do you have to call anyone who disagrees with you names? Surely you can do better than that?....

Again there is another pile of falsehoods added to the rapidly expanding pile of falsehoods.

My viewpoint coincides with the very clearly expressed viewpoint linked.

Here again:

It is a matter well known, and well understood, that by the laws of our country, every question which affects a man's life, reputation, or property, must be tried by twelve of his peers; and that their unanimous verdict is, alone, competent to determine the fact in issue.

Constructing false versions of the clear meaning expressed clearly is the work that can be discovered during the jury trial, according to the common law.

Joe. I love that line " In the world of the Sociopaths, the Psychopaths, etc. It tells everything in such a concise manner. Size matters.

False friendship is added to the pile.

Robert, excellent offer of meaning. So full of ideas on my end, Napoleon size on one end, working to make everyone the same size, but cutting everyone short instead. Thanks.  

RSS

© 2017   Created by Keith Broaders.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service