"Uninformed Juries a Formidable Farce"

man from North Carolina once found himself on a jury in a county trial against a black man charged with assaulting a black woman in front of a local service station (gasoline or petrol pump).

    As he assessed the lack of "evidence" in the case, and appraised the situation, he surmised: "It was clear to me that the district attorney was trying to make conviction points for his next political venture, and the judge was giving him plenty of support."

    He commented to the other jurors that he couldn't see why the case was ever brought to trial, and the next thing he knew, they had elected him jury foreman.

    As foreman this man named Frank explained to the other jurors that: "From the Magna Carta common law, a part of the U. S. Constitution by reference, court oaths imposed on the jury are not binding and cannot be enforced."

    He also pointed out: "The Constitution gives the accused the benefit of all doubt."

    As a result, within 10 minutes the jury came to a unanimous "not guilty" verdict, and returned to the court to announce their decision.

    Frank rose and told the judge: "Your honor, it is the unanimous verdict of this jury the man is not guilty and it is my understanding from the U.S. Constitution this verdict is not subject to question or appeal."

    In Frank's words:

    "The judge turned purple, rapped the bench with his gavel, and said loudly, 'Court dismissed.'   The fact is, most judges and attorneys do not want an informed jury. They prefer an ignorant, manipulatable jury to be putty in their hands.

    "Unfortunately, those judges and attorneys who disagree with this corrupt power grab are vastly outnumbered.   Consequently, most Americans have been subject to manipulation and are wholly unaware that they can overrule a judge.

    "And so it is that, based on the education I gave the other jurors about their rights to overrule the judge, the court will likely never call me back again to serve on a jury."

    That's probably true.   This author has personally been on the receiving end of a "guilty" verdict in a felony trial for an entirely invented "crime" with absolutely no evidence of any guilt, or even guilty intent (because there simply was none, and the "evidence" was a result of entrapment and deliberate falsification of the so-called evidence by either the court reporter, the prosecuting attorney, or both).

    I can tell you first hand that the corrupt courts stack juries by the type of people that they commonly call to serve on a jury.

    For example, present in court on the day of jury selection, the day my jury was picked, were all types of government employees, law enforcement and other government employees, including the county clerk who was my false accuser before the grand jury, the very person who had filed the letter I was being accused of filing, as though filing a document in a public record is now some sort of "crime".

    Though not chosen for my jury that day, for obvious reasons, she doubtless was picked to serve on other juries, quite often.

    On my jury was a state welfare worker who apparently had a hostile attitude toward me from a previous encounter, and the local public school principal (I had been a home schooler for more than 20 years when my trial took place, and still had seven children living and schooled at home, in a small rural community where gossip and supposed "dirt" are freely shoveled about among the locals).

    The jury -- in fact any jury to be picked from such people -- was as manipulatable as they come.   Actually, they probably didn't need any manipulation whatever, since the fact of no evidence didn't stop them from quickly returning a "guilty verdict" against the evidence, against a man refused to right to have any assistance of counsel or even to call any non-hostile defense witnesses!

    Of course, in its instructions to the jury, the court kept them ignorant on these key points, and they apparently never questioned the oddities that went on in court that day, including State's Exhibit #1,which was strangely missing the file stamp, which had been whited out to conceal it, leaving no proof that the document had ever been filed in any public record (because it wasn't filed by myself; See: Flaw Enfarcement Reaps Bitter Harvest in this issue ).

    There's just one thing Frank neglected to realize.

    What America needs is a small army of Franks, moving about from county to county and from state to state, freely offering to sit on juries wherever they go.

    Once one county judge or court seeks to exclude them, they should move to where the are not known, and continue their work of fully informing fellow jurors of the law and truth about the jury's right of nullification, or overruling bad law, as well as bad judges and bad prosecuting attorneys.

    Until such time as jurors become aware and concerned about the legal abuses and crimes to which they are being made a willing party, the promise of fully informed juries of our peers executing true justice will remain only a false hope.

    So long as trial by jury remains a corrupt and cruel joke, uninformed juries will continue to be a formidable farce, and many more innocent people will be harmed, and their lives destroyed, by these evils posing as "law and order," in a land where flaw and disorder in the court are the result of the petty "legal" tyrants and crooks in our midst who have made our legal institutions their hideouts.