“Totally Incorrect”: Juries, Justice and Education

Courtesy of Lise from Maine

“As some of you know, I read a great deal; I purchase a book a week for the most part and sometimes I get two of them and actually read them. Yesterday I picked up a book called “Totally Incorrect” by Doug Casey (written in 2012).

In this book there is a chapter on “Juries and Justice” and a chapter on “education” which he agrees with Charlotte Iserbyt is nothing more than “training.” I suggest that you read the book, and if you cannot afford it, then perhaps you can get it at the library or their interlibrary loan program.

His ideas are very insightful but I don’t always agree with him. Right now I will share some of what he says about “Juries and Justice.”

He is in agreement that “juries” are a good idea but he claims that jurors must be “independent thinkers” and not be easily swayed or pressured by any “groupthink” mentality. He continues to say “they are a good balance against the tremendous power of judges.”

In actuality, judges have very little power since it is the “jury” who decides causes under the constitution except in “equity” situations because the jury verdict, if a jury is utilized at all, is ONLY “advisory.”

The “judge” in an “equity” jurisdiction is actually a “Chancellor” (his title)but guess what? There is NO such thing as Chancellors regarding the “judges” here in Maine right from the start.

For the Legislature to pass a “pretend” fraudulent law (1821) and “mix” both common law jurisdiction and equity jurisdiction together is NOT lawful as the people are “guaranteed” a trial by jury of the vicinity and “of his peers.” Equity and common law jurisdictions are very different jurisdictions and must be separated as it was in England, this did not happen here in Maine.

A guarantee of a trial by jury of the vicinity and of his peers means that no one has to “ask” for such a trial by jury. It is guaranteed under the “original” Constitution of the State of Maine, and the jury verdict is NOT advisory.

An appeal process is available to the people.

The “equity” jurisdiction does NOT participate in criminal matters except it was involved in criminal situations in the 1870s here in Maine whereby a “judge” could hold someone in contempt for NOT following a court order and send someone off to jail. This is fraud and treason against the people and increases the powers of the state via the judge unlawfully.

Prior to the 1870s, the “bond” that someone purchased and filed into court is assurance that the cause would or could be settled if the court order was violated.

Remember, in an “equity” jurisdiction the “judge” has discretion. Under the constitution there is NO mention of “equity,” and he does NOT have discretion to decide a cause since a trial by jury is guaranteed.

Any commissions that I have examined never ever said “Chancellor” as a title.

Keep in mind that the commission provides a public office and a title to the person so named in his commission.

No title of “Chancellor” means that the judge cannot hear a cause in “equity.”

He either has the title or he does not.

Mr. Casey further states: “The way juries are run today is really a form of involuntary servitude.”

You either show up or you could be held in contempt and will have to deal with the judge’s decision(s) – go to jail or pay a fine, etc. Nothing is voluntary about it.

He continues to say: “Worse, there’s the jury selection process called “voir dire.”

By the way, I address this in my book.

‘Voir dire” is the process of eliminating potential jurors which is in actuality an “interrogation process,” and who shows “bias” in the attorney’s case, and that the attorney seeks someone who will believe what they are told claims Mr. Casey.

He further states: “That usually means that anyone exhibiting independent thinking, or who is prone to value justice over law enforcement, gets removed and will never serve on a jury.”

He continues: “People who think in concepts are weeded out as troublemakers.” He believes that the quality of juries today are operating at a low level of intelligence and ability to think through various situations.

This is exactly what the state wants as well as the general government so they can ensure a conviction (criminal) or a loss of a cause (civil).

Does the “dumbing down” of the population tie into this? Of course, it fits in nicely.

Furthermore, are these “dumbed down” jurors actually “of your peers?”

No!

The people are guaranteed a trial by jury of the vicinity and “of his peers” under the “original” constitution.

Susan B. Anthony argued in her 1873 cause that the jurors were all men and were not of “her” peers. She lost her cause and justly so because she argued the wrong issue(s).

The jurors of today operate at below average intelligence and cannot display any independent thinking in deciphering the facts before them.

He continues to say that the so-called justice system in this country is actually a “penal” system enforcing the laws as opposed to “defending” people from fraud and force.

He also says that justice is about making the victim “whole” once again by having the injured party receive compensation from those who have violated him or her – a genuine injured party, an actual victim who was violated.

I will stop here regarding his book. His book is well worth reading.

I address the jury system here in Maine which was lost by the people by 1935.

Keep in mind that “education” and the “jury system” tie in together. If you have dumb people on the jury who cannot decipher facts/laws by intelligent thinking, you will be convicted or lose your cause. It is happening more and more in this country, and more and more innocent people are going to jail for it.

Isn’t it in the governments’ interest to “dumb down” the population?

Of course!

As an example look at the Deschaine case here in Maine. DNA shows that he didn’t murder the 12 year old but he still remains in prison.

Why?

Is there a financial incentive to keep him jailed? Do you suppose that bonds and more are sold on Wall Street regarding each prisoner?

Where is the justice in this case?

There isn’t any.

All for now.”

To view Lise’s research, type in “Lise from Maine” in the search box.

Advertisements
Published in: on May 18, 2014 at 8:52 pm  Comments (5)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://unmasker4maine.wordpress.com/2014/05/18/totally-incorrect-juries-and-justice/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

5 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. With all due respect, I wish to notify the author that Article III, Section 2, of the national Constitution states that, “the judicial power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and……” The 6th Amendment guarantees the right to a jury trial in criminal prosecutions, and the 7th Amendment secures the right to jury trial in “Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars….”

  2. Hi Wayne,

    Great comment!

    It stimulates my thinking and thanks for that.

    This is what is needed in order to conduct analysis of different issues which, for the most part, provides more understanding or maybe it provides more confusion.

    Who knows?

    For me it is more comprehension of the issues – more angles to examine from a different perspective.

    To be fair to Mr. Casey, he had a great deal more to say in the chapter as above-mentioned which I left out because it would have been too much to disclose but I shared some of it on this blog because I saw an opportunity (a door opener) and grabbed it in order to educate once more.

    When an opportunity arises, I grab it in the moment as much as I can.

    That’s my nature, and I had to do that as a licensed clinician.

    The author (he is a researcher in the financial world – economist/investor – and is well known) may be speaking about the Constitution of the United States (it doesn’t say) but I used his material to “show” the people that others are “catching on” to the fraud and treason of the court system.

    He doesn’t say anything about equity, I did instead and connected it to the fraud in the Maine’s court system. I saw the opportunity to do that.

    It looks like I may have mislead you, Wayne. Sorry for that.

    In actuality he prefers to have a “free market” privatized court system of which I have not researched to see if this would work better and lawfully for the people.

    Maybe he is right and maybe he is not.

    I don’t know.

    He continues to say: “Justice is a service for which there is a market – that juries and courts should be privatized.”

    What he is “really” saying is get governments “out” of the “justice” business, and he recognizes that there isn’t any justice any longer so maybe the “free market” can provide that service and “compete” for business.

    So if you can’t get “justice” in one business then you can go to another business that “does” provide it.

    It is called the “free market.”

    Remember, he is a business man so he thinks in terms of business ventures.

    I also used his material to make a “connection” to the Constitution of the State of Maine (original) as it relates to judges, juries, equity, education, etc.

    Here is more that he said: “but the whole legal system is rotten to the core. It needs to be scrapped – someone needs to push the reset button and restore justice as its guiding principle – and that, too, is a distortion that can’t be corrected easily and painlessly.”

    He further states: “If we’re to have juries, they ought to be truly juries of our peers – people who can understand you and the facts pertaining to your case. But we’re far, far from an ideal system.”

    Mr. Casey’s chapter on “Juries and Justice” provides some great insights and provokes independent thinking that he advocates which I have accomplished.

    Furthermore, this chapter needs to be read more than once and analyzed thoroughly.

    I have done that.

    My goal is to educate as much as I can so I think I have done that here on this blog.

    Any more comments?

    Comments stimulates one’s thinking so I welcome them even if you disagree with me.

    Thank you!

    Lise from Maine

  3. Hi!

    By the way, the Founding Fathers of Maine (Eliphaz Chapman, Esq from my little town) and the Founding Fathers of the general government were NOT stupid enough to allow the government to be involved in education.

    That would be “too much” power given to the said governments and “they” could decide what is taught and what is not taught.

    The original Constitution of the State of Maine does NOT say anything about the government’s involvement with education and neither does the Constitution of the United States.

    That is the parents responsibility, and when the government gets involved in education and “mandates” attendance, that is “taking” power away from the parents, the people.

    Remember, the governments “take” from others unlawfully.

    Thank you!

    Lise from Maine

    • Not only is it “taking power away from the parents, the people”, but it’s also laying the ground work for indoctrinating the children to accept authoritarian government (statism) and places a heavy financial burden on property owners, many of whom never had children of their own or any real say about the curriculum of the education system.

  4. Hi Nelson,

    Great thoughts!

    I totally agree.

    Laying the “ground work” regarding indoctrination and statism is actually a “secondary” process.

    The “primary” process was to “steal” from the parents, the people, first which the governments accomplish very well unlawfully using fraudulent laws created by the legislatures and the congress.

    Furthermore, property tax is really a “use” tax since NO slaves can own property (see Congressional Record of 1933) in these United States.

    To tax someone “out” of their homes at age 85, etc is grossly unlawful.

    The legislatures can tax “some” property when the “owners” request a “benefit” of the state(s)/general government.

    No benefit(s) = no tax.

    Property taxes as applied these days are unlawful and a communist ploy.

    Study the “early” laws regarding education in Maine, and it has shown to be “local control” if the people decide to finance education locally – raising money, purchasing land, building school house(s), teacher(s) salary, and maintenance of said property. The people at the local level (towns, cities, plantations) can decide to do “nothing” in terms of education if they so desire and decide. The same with court houses, etc.

    What choice do the people have today? Very little, if any.

    Local control? Most of it is now gone.

    A school board meeting is still about raising money for the support of education although other issues are raised from time to time.

    I know as I am a “current” school board member, and anyone in the town can attend the meetings whereby there isn’t a “2 minute limit” about speaking their minds as what happened in New Hampshire recently regarding the lawyer who went over the 2 minute crazy limit and got arrested. This limit was crazy and unlawful and the people’s power is NOT limited.

    The superintendent (SAD 44) is superb and a great listener as well as imparts knowledge.

    “Local control” is the people’s power plain and simple.

    “Centralization” (state power) began in the 1840s whereby males of a certain age were mandated to attend public schools for a certain period of time, and this is fraud and treason against the people, the parents. At that time, society in Maine was mostly agricultural, and the parents needed these males to work the farm and prepare for winter survival otherwise they would freeze and starve.

    The state via the legislature had NO delegation of authority to create such a law. Females were not mentioned in that law.

    All for now.

    Thank you!

    Lise from Maine


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: