Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ex-Texan
It's terrible. The judges are out of control and they are protecting each other. I didn't know a judge could ignore a law/sepenia from congress and I don't know if there is anything we can do about it. I call on the freepers and the bloggers to find the solution and spread the word.
2 posted on 03/27/2005 12:15:44 PM PST by alienken (Bumper sticker idea- We have God in heaven & a Texan in the whitehouse,LIFE IS GOOD!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: alienken

The politicians are in the same bed.


3 posted on 03/27/2005 12:19:19 PM PST by freecopper01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: alienken

"It's terrible. The judges are out of control and they are protecting each other. I didn't know a judge could ignore a law/sepenia from congress and I don't know if there is anything we can do about it. I call on the freepers and the bloggers to find the solution and spread the word."

There is one thing we can all do about it and that is to stop paying our taxes. Without our money, they cannot operate.


7 posted on 03/27/2005 12:25:44 PM PST by freekitty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: alienken
We already have the tools and hold the power over judges. Unfortunately an 1894 ruling by the supreme court ruled that we don't need to know our rights. In Sparf vs US (156 US 51), the court ruled that although juries have the right to ignore a judge's instructions on the law, they don't have to be made aware of the right to do so.

http://www.caught.net/juror.htm


Prior to that ruling judges were simple mediators in the courtrooms and the people were the judiciary branch of government. Jurors hold more than the power to judge guilt or innocence, they hold the power to judge the law as well.

JOHN ADAMS (1771): It's not only ....(the juror's) right, but his duty, in that case, to find the verdict according to his own best understanding, judgement, and conscience, though in direct opposition to the direction of the court.

JOHN JAY (1794): The jury has a right to judge both the law as well as the fact in controversy.

SAMUEL CHASE (1804): The jury has the right to determine both the law and the facts.

OLIVER WENDELL HOLMES (1920): The jury has the power to bring a verdict in the teeth of both the law and the facts.

LORD DENMAN, (in C.J. O'Connel v. R. ,1884): "Every jury in the land is tampered with and falsely instructed by the judge when it is told it must take (or accept) as the law that which has been given to them, or that they must bring in a certain verdict, or that they can decide only the facts of the case."



Many more quotes including similar supreme court opinions here.
http://www.levellers.org/jrp/orig/jrp.jurquotes.htm


In not knowing our rights we have handed the scepter of power to judges and attorneys. There isn't a judge in the land who's going to inform us of our rights and there are very few attorneys who will do so. If they begin telling jurors of their rights, they lose their death grip on the courts.
14 posted on 03/27/2005 12:49:22 PM PST by cripplecreek (I'm apathetic but really don't care.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: alienken
Judge Greer, George Felos, Michael Schiavo... may the fleas of a thousand bubonic plague carrying rats, infest your pubic regions forever or until you rot in hell!
15 posted on 03/27/2005 12:50:10 PM PST by B-Cause (Terri Schiavo is a victim of judicial homicide!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson