View single post by Joe Kelley
 Posted: Fri Sep 21st, 2018 10:11 am
PM Quote Reply Full Topic
Joe Kelley


Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6290
"THE GRAND JURY originated in England as the accusing body in the administration of criminal justice. At the Assize of Clarendon, in 1166, Henry II provided that twelve knights or twelve "good and lawful men" of every hundred and four lawful men of every vill disclose under oath the names of those in the community believed guilty of criminal offenses. Members of this inquisitorial body were obliged to present to the judge sworn accusations against all suspected offenders. Unlike petit juries, grand juries were not to pass upon guilt or innocence but were to decide only whether an individual should be brought to trial. At first all accusations originated with the members of the inquest themselves, but gradually the juries came to consider accusations made by outsiders as well. The jurors then heard only witnesses against the accused and, if they were convinced that there were grounds for trial, indicted him. They also passed upon indictments laid before them by crown prosecutors, returning a "true bill" if they found the accusation true or "no bill" if they found it false. However, the juries never lost their power to accuse on their own knowledge. This they did by making a presentment to the court. The presentment represented an accusation on the jury's own initiative while an indictment represented a charge that originated outside the membership. Under their power of presentment English grand juries could and did investigate any mater that appeared to them to involve a violation of the law."

That was England where the criminals took over and the criminals enforced top-down (master/slave) fake government upon people who were formerly independent, free, in Liberty, fixed by common law with trial by jury.

The criminals take the common law courts and replace them with summary justice (master/slave) courts, also known as kangaroo courts.

In England, the King (criminal) was said (false claim) to be the only sovereign. In America after the Declaration of Independence, and during the forming of independent states, and the forming of a federation of independent states, the people did away with rule by one individual, and in place of rule by one individual was placed, firmly, rule by all the people on an equal footing, under the common law.

Whereas the King could issue a Writ, such as a Habeas Corpus writ, or Quo Warranto, in Britan, that type of legal demand for justice was assumed by all the people (who knew about it) in America. We all became kings under our forming association for our mutual defense, under our Americanized common law.

That is the fix, at least the peaceful one, and the violent one is just more of the same divide and conquer boom and bust cycle, where the sociopaths gain more power over their subjects.