Friday, January 27, 2012

The Juror

The Juror
By Leon Howard

One of our ‘inalienable rights’ is to a trial by a jury of our peers; most Americans avoid jury duty at all reasonable costs. When we do avoid this duty, we miss one of the best opportunities to bring our judiciary and our unconstitutional laws back in control of those who loaned the power to govern us – We, the People!

Most judges and courts will not inform jurors they have the power to judge the law and its application. It is called “Jury Nullification” and the governments hate it! Why? Because it holds our servants ‘in-check’ and prevents tyranny! The judges and prosecutor will not tell you that you cannot nullify; they just don’t mention it! In Washington state, the judge “instructs” the jury as to what the jury’s “finding” can be and – surprise, surprise! – No mention of nullification!

Eleven years ago, I was notified to report for jury duty – Something I had always wanted to do – I reported to the Superior Court and was empaneled! It was a drug dealer case and, although I support legalization of drugs so they can be taxed, I wanted to serve with an open mind. The judge started asking the 12 of us a series of questions to reveal racial bias, prejudice, etc. Most of the questions were easy to comply with but he then asked, “Can you take instruction from the bench?”

I like to think I am an honest person and I raised my hand – The judge asked me, “Why?” I started to answer him when the prosecutor interrupted and said, “Leon, I have your letter here and, your honor, I request a side-bar.” The letter he spoke of was one I had written in response to the Jury Summons and Questionnaire; I stated in the letter that most of their questions were irrelevant and inappropriate to ask of a potential juror! I further stated that, “ … I am of majority age, a freeman, and a fully informed juror.” The prosecutor requested the side-bar so I wouldn’t pollute the entire jury pool as to what that statement meant.

At the side-bar, the judge read the letter and asked me, “You cannot accept instruction from the bench?” I said, “No, your honor, unless that instruction informs the jurors of their power to judge the law and its application in this case, I will not accept instruction from the bench.” The judge stated, “You cannot serve on my jury; you are excused.”

I so wanted to challenge him on that statement with, “I thought I was serving on their jury.” (the defendants) But I didn’t and I regret that today! Next time I am called for Jury Duty, I will suppress the urge to raise my hand when the questions are asked so I can serve my duty (I do believe it is my duty and the duty of every liberty-minded American to serve that duty when called!) We, the People, must hold our courts accountable; otherwise, tyranny comes to the forefront and there is no liberty for anybody!

Jury nullification occurs when a jury returns a verdict of "Not Guilty" despite its belief that the defendant is guilty of the violation charged.  The jury in effect nullifies a law that it believes is either immoral or wrongly applied to the defendant whose fate they are charged with deciding.

Jury nullification has a long and colorful history but the most famous nullification case is the 1735 trial of  John Peter Zenger, charged with printing seditious libels of the Governor of the Colony of New York, William Cosby.  Despite the fact that Zenger clearly printed the alleged libels (the only issue the court said the jury was free to decide, as the court deemed the truth or falsity of the statements to be irrelevant), the jury nonetheless returned a verdict of "Not Guilty." 

Once a jury returns a verdict of "Not Guilty," that verdict cannot be questioned by any court and the "double jeopardy" clause of the Constitution prohibits a retrial on the same charge. Our first Chief Justice, John Jay, told jurors: "You have a right to take upon yourselves to judge [both the facts and law]." Thomas Jefferson said, "I consider trial by jury as the only anchor yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution."  Further, the jury's veto power protects minorities from "the body of the people, operating by the majority against the minority." (James Madison, June 8, 1789) Twelve people taken randomly from the population will represent both friends and opponents of the party in power. With fully-informed juries, the government cannot exercise its powers over the people without the consent of the people. Trial by jury is trial by the people. When juries are not allowed to judge law, it becomes trial by the government. "In short, if the jury have no right to judge of the justice of a law of the government, they plainly can do nothing to protect the people against the oppressions of government; for there are no oppressions which the government may not authorize by law." (Lysander Spooner,"Jury Power" by L. & J. Osburn)

"Jury lawlessness is the greatest corrective of law in its actual 
administration. The will of the state at large imposed on a reluctant 
community, the will of a majority imposed on a vigorous and determined 
minority, find the same obstacle in the local jury that formerly confronted 
kings and ministers."
 U.S. Court of Appeals District of Columbia
Source: U.S. v. Dougherty, 473 F.2d 1113, 1130 at note 32 (1972).

"I know, may it please your honour, the jury may do so; but I do likewise know 
they may do otherwise. I know they have the right, beyond all dispute, to 
determine both the law and the fact; and where they do not doubt the law, they 
ought to do so. This of leaving it to the judgment of the Court whether the 
words are libelous or not in effect renders juries useless (to say no worse) in 
many cases."
 Alexander Hamilton
(1757-1804)
Source: August 4, 1735, made to the jury as defense counsel at the seditious libel trial of John Peter Zenger; Rex. V. Zenger, How. St. Tr. 17:675 (1735); quoted in Stanley N. Katz, Introduction to James Alexander, A Brief Narrative Of The Case And Trial Of John Peter Zenger, 3-5 (Stanley N. Katz ed. 1963).

Jury nullification has had it’s injustices as well, most notably the “Not Guilty” verdicts in some notorious cases in which all-white southern juries in the 1950s and 1960s refused to convict white supremacists for killing blacks or civil rights workers despite overwhelming evidence of their guilt. So, yes, there have been good and bad nullifications but the question of whether or not jurors should be able to nullify must always be answered with a resounding: “Yes!”

The Constitutions, both State and Federal, are contracts between the People and the government; the government’s power comes from the governed and it is “on loan” to the government – The People never abandoned their power to the government; that is what it means to be a Republic! The best way to evaluate government’s “just power” is to think in the simplest format (something bureaucracies aren’t capable of doing) Using the “first person”, I must ask myself, “Can I do this to another person myself, without violating the other person’s inalienable rights?” If I can answer that question in the affirmative, “Yes!”, then that is the ‘just power’ I am loaning to the government on my behalf. If I cannot answer the question in the affirmative, then the power is unjust and is proof the government is usurping powers not granted to them. An excellent example of usurped power is the “wealth redistribution” this government has been guilty of since they started giving “income tax rebates” to those Americans who pay no taxes whatsoever! That is theft, plain and simple! No matter what ‘warm and fuzzy’ terms they use to “explain” it – It is still theft!

Going back to the “first person” scenario, as a person not making enough money to be paying the tax, I cannot go out to you (part of the 53%) and tell you to give me money and, unless you are a fool, you are going to say, “No!” But if I stick a gun in your face and demand your money, you are going to give it to me, unless you are a fool!

How do you stop the usurpation of power? Obviously, the first place to go is back to the 535 idiots in Congress and point out their abuse and demand they repeal the law! But, when we look at it, how successful has that been? We still have the “income tax rebates” to 47% of the People being stolen from the other 53%! We still have the “Patriot Act” and the majority of the People have repeatedly told the 535 idiots it violates our inalienable rights; we now have the NDAA language that has the provision for the President to authorize American citizens to be imprisoned by our military, suspend ‘habeas corpus’, deny bail, never be charged with anything, and held until ‘the end of hostilities’!

Oh, they say it could never happen; President Zero stated he would never sign that order (that makes me all warm & fuzzy!); and some in Congress say they are going to “fix it”! Why the hell was it passed in the first place? Oh, I forgot; I already answered that: 535 idiots in Congress! Many of us warned these idiots the language was there and to remove it weeks before they voted to pass it but these elitist fools think the American People are too stupid to know anything!

What they so conveniently forget is the Constitution is OUR Constitution and it is the limits put on the government by us, the People!

Short of taking up arms against these idiots, we have two (2) choices: 1.) Vote them all out of office and place citizen legislators in their place and, 2.) Jury nullification of any case brought before the court where Americans are indicted on these unconstitutional statutes! My take is we must do both! Vote the bums out and jurors need to nullify! The Republic will become history if we do not take charge!

To learn more about becoming a fully-informed juror, I would suggest:




No comments:

Post a Comment