jail4judges : Messages : 746-776 of 1786

J.A.I.L. News Journal
_____________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California September 28, 2003

J.A.I.L. Absolutely Unique

(By Ron Branson, Author/Founder)

"I believe trial by jury is the only anchor yet imagined by man which can hold a government to the principles of its constitution."

Perhaps no man influenced the infrastructure of the foundations of our new experiment known as a Constitutional Republic in America more so than did Thomas Jefferson. America history is rife with quotes of him, the above being no exception. Jefferson has received praise from all walks of life, and statues have been erected to him, including the Jefferson Memorial in Washington, D.C. There are even those who proclaim themselves to be "Jeffersonians."

After the order of Thomas Jefferson, and our other Founding Fathers, two-hundred and nineteen years later, (April, 1995), J.A.I.L. ("Judicial Accountability & Integrity Legislation") has come into existence on the American scene. While not yet recognized for its full value, it is as important as our original Constitution itself.

Now while some of you are picking yourself up from the floor where you have been laying and holding your chest while gasping for air, let me explain. There is absolutely no competition between the U.S. Constitution and J.A.I.L., for neither can be complete without the other. I know some of you are saying, "These are hard words," while others murmur "Treason," noting that our country has existed for over 200 years without the existence of J.A.I.L., and so we have.

But the fact remains, unless you have been living on another planet, that our Constitution, after 200 years of existence, has been reduced to just a piece of paper given political lip service, cited as authority only when it serves one's political agenda. All government officials, in theory, give solemn oath to it, pledging to uphold and defend it against all enemies, foreign and domestic, while few of these people have ever read it in their life, and even fewer understand it.

Thomas Jefferson said, "Let no more be heard of confidence in men, but rather bind them down by the chains of the Constitution." Most politicians accept the idea, as adopted by many judges in our courts today, that our Constitution was intended by our Founding Fathers to be rubberized, and those links of "chains to bind them down," spoken of by Thomas Jefferson, are made of elastic.

In the quote of Thomas Jefferson above, "I believe trial by jury is the only anchor yet imagined by man which can hold a government to the principles of its constitution," we note that the intent of Jefferson's words was holding government to the principles of the Constitution. He said, "I believe trial by jury is the only anchor yet imagined by man, and in 1776, he was correct. But then came along J.A.I.L. two centuries later as "another anchor imagined by man to hold government to the principles of the Constitution!"

In the days of Thomas Jefferson, he had a limited knowledge of options, and based thereon, he determined that a trial by jury was the only anchor imagined by man to hold government to the principles of the Constitution. Had Thomas Jefferson then been enlightened to the concept of J.A.I.L., notwithstanding its current title, history would doubtless record Thomas Jefferson as the author of J.A.I.L.

In fact, even in his day, Thomas Jefferson, disappointed in the lack of a provision in our current Constitution, was searching for some Constitutional measure, such as J.A.I.L., that would result in judicial accountability of judges. He said, "At the establishment of our Constitutions, the judiciary bodies were supposed to be the most helpless and harmless members of the government. Experience, however, soon showed us in what way they were to become the most dangerous; that the insufficiency of the means provided for their removal gave them a freehold and irresponsibility in office; that their decisions, seeming to concern individual suitors only, pass silent and unheeded by the public at large; that these decisions, nevertheless, become law by precedent, sapping little and little, the foundations of the Constitution, before anyone perceived that invisible and helpless worm had been busily employed in consuming its substance. In truth, man is not made to be trusted for life, if secured against all liability to account."

In the founding of our country, and in the providence of God Almighty working in hearts of our Founding Fathers, the revelation of J.A.I.L. was not yet to be revealed. But now in this generation, God, according to the good pleasure of His will, has chosen to reveal the concept of J.A.I.L. to this, and other nations.

Above I stated that J.A.I.L. was equally as important as is the original Constitution itself. How so? you say. It was Thomas Jefferson himself that expressed the lack of a means of security of the very Constitution he had a part in writing, stating that he feared the politically motivated Judiciary Industry would completely undermine the Constitution until it became just a worthless piece of paper.

Thomas Jefferson warned us as surely as if it were printed in today's newspapers, "...the Federal Judiciary; an irresponsible body (for impeachment is scarcely a scare-crow), working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing it's noiseless step like a thief, over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall be usurped from the States, and the government of all be consolidated into one. ... when all government ... in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the centre of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated." -- Thomas Jefferson, 1821.

So, we arrive at the question, which is of the greater value, the preservation of the principles of our original Constitution, or the means by which it is protected? They are inseparable, and neither can exist without the other. As a practical matter, everyone should respect the existence of J.A.I.L. as if it were authored by Thomas Jefferson himself, and I believe he would have been delighted to have his name associated with it. I realize it is hard to conceive of a document outside of the Constitution that is so important as is our Constitution itself, but God has now brought to light the revelation of J.A.I.L. to this nation, and calls upon America to support it for its very future's sake.

There are many groups, organizations, political parties, and coalitions with their own agendas throughout America which pay little or no attention to J.A.I.L. This does not concern me in the least, for I know by the Grace of God, one of these days all these causes will have to reckon with the validity of the value of J.A.I.L. being equal to that of our Constitution itself, and in that day we will have the opportunity to move in unity for the restitution of the government envisioned by Thomas Jefferson.

Those who wish to receive a copy of the "Judicial Accountability & Integrity Legislation" now being proposed to Congress, (also in the Library of Congress), may write to VictoryUSA@..., and we will be happy to email you a copy.

J.A.I.L.- Judicial Accountability Initiative Law - www.jail4judges.org
JAIL is a unique addition to our form of gov't. heretofore unrealized.
JAIL is powerful! JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope!
JAIL is taking America like a wildfire! AddRemove@...
JAIL is making inroads into Congress for federal accountability!
E-Groups sign on at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/join
Get involved at JAIL_SALE_USA-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Donate offerings to J.A.I.L., P.O. Box 207, N. Hollywood, CA 91603
"Give me your wealth, and I will give you America" - Ron Branson

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><

#747

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 4:00 am
Subject: Chief Justice Speaks On Fear

jail4judges@...

J.A.I.L. News Journal
_____________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California September 29, 2003

Chief Justice New Mexico Supreme Court (Ret.) Speaks On Fear

What fear is doing to our freedoms

By Gene E. Franchini, retired chief justice of the New Mexico Supreme Court

....

http://www.abqtrib.com/archives/opinions03/092603_opinions_patriot.shtml

For the next few minutes, I would like to speak with you about a subject which I'm sure every New Mexico Foundation for Open Government member cherishes . . . "the public's right to know." ....

Fear is the most debilitating of all human emotions. A fearful person will do anything, say anything, accept anything, reject anything, if it makes him feel more secure for his own, his family's or his country's security and safety, whether it actually accomplishes it or not.

It works like a charm. A fearful people are the easiest to govern. Their freedom and liberty can be taken away, and they can be convinced to believe that it was done for their own good - to give them security. They can be convinced to give up their liberty - voluntarily.

Recently, the passage of the USA Patriot Act and the Homeland Security Act have resulted in the most direct attacks on the Bill of Rights that I have seen in my lifetime. These acts were passed without any meaningful opposition and still have considerable public support.

The USA Patriots Act is an acronym for "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism."

The way that government is going to be provided with these "appropriate tools" is to "temporarily" suspend or eliminate as much of our Constitution and its Bill of Rights as it can, without court oversight or intervention, so that we will not be at a disadvantage in the war against terrorism. That's the idea.

Think about that for a minute, and then ask yourself: Why in the world would we voluntarily do to ourselves that which our enemies over the last 200-plus years have not been able to do to us by force? Why would we be so willing to give up our God-given rights that have been verbalized in our Constitution, when we have fought so hard to preserve them?

It almost boggles the mind, when one considers what fear for one's safety and security can accomplish. These bipartisan, virtually unopposed, legislative, governmental actions are saying to us, "If you temporarily give up some of your liberty and freedom now, you will be made more secure in the future."

That, my friends, is a terrible lie. To paraphrase Benjamin Franklin, "One who trades his freedoms for security, deserves neither." I might add that person will finally lose both.

The people have a right to know what their government intends to do about the war on terrorism, and that includes all of its branches - including the judicial branch.

In a time of war, actual or threatened, our courts have, in my opinion, repeatedly abdicated their function of equally interpreting and applying the Constitution, bowing instead to "national security."

The most horrible example was when the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the internment of Japanese Americans during the Second World War, because the government claimed they were a security threat. It took Congress some 50 years to attempt to rectify that horrible opinion.

Did we learn anything? I'm afraid not. Today, with this unending war on terrorism, our government has taken steps again to radically infringe upon the right to counsel, reasonable search and seizure, the right to a speedy and fair trial, and other fundamental liberties, for fear of losing our security.

We can hope that, eventually, the U.S. Supreme Court will subject these infringements to real constitutional scrutiny. Unfortunately, the courts have historically yielded to wartime fears and claims that our security interests would be jeopardized. Those prior wars ended before long and, when they did, the country regretted the fact that it had abandoned the Constitution, even temporarily.

The war on terrorism is different. It's a war on an old idea - one that has been used for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. It is a horribly destructive idea, but history has shown that you can't kill an idea, however horrible, by killing those who have it. You kill or replace an idea only by coming up with a better one. So far, we haven't really tried to come up with a better one.

No one can even guess how long this war will last. In the meantime, Americans, as well as aliens, have been harshly affected by governmental measures after 9-11.

The attorney general of the United States had more than 1,000 aliens detained, keeping their names and locations secret. There are over 600 left at Guantanamo in Cuba. He ordered many deportation hearings in secret. He required visitors from 25 countries, mostly Muslims, to register with the government; and, if they didn't within 40 days, they were subject to arrest, detention and deportation - no public trials, no lawyers - all in secret, in the name of preserving security.

For example, one American citizen, Yasser Hamdi, was found under unexplained circumstances on a battlefield in Afghanistan. He was classified as an "enemy combatant," a new term which the government created to give it the power to seize and hold American citizens indefinitely, without counsel or trial, and without any effective review by the courts. He was totally isolated and not allowed to see a lawyer. He was not charged with any crime.

However difficult, lawyers came forward and were eventually allowed to defend Hamdi. They immediately challenged his detention on constitutional grounds - specifically, that this American was denied his right to counsel, his right to know the charges against him, the right to face his accusers, and his right to a fair and speedy trial.

The federal 4th Circuit Court of Appeals sidestepped the Constitution and ignored Hamdi's constitutional rights as an American. Its holding: "The defendant, an American citizen, classified as an `enemy combatant,' does not have a constitutional right to counsel or trial, because `Mr. Hamdi was not being prosecuted.'"

The government, therefore, can impose solitary confinement indefinitely, by simply avoiding charging the defendant and giving such a defendant a lawyer or a trial. If this isn't a violation of the Sixth Amendment, Hamdi at least has certainly been deprived of liberty without due process of law.

James Madison, the principal author of the Bill of Rights, must be spinning in his grave. Most Americans would be shocked, I think, if they realized that they could be classified as an "enemy combatant," taken off the street, imprisoned indefinitely and not be given the opportunity to call a lawyer. But you can, my friends. At least one federal appellate court has established that precedent.

Since 1990, (the Foundation for Open Government) has had a single mission: to help the general public, students, educators, public officials, media and legal professionals understand, obtain and exercise First Amendment rights, as well as their rights under the New Mexico Open Meetings Act and Federal Freedom of Information Act.

The First Amendment is most important, or it would not have been the first. But please don't forget the other nine, which, together with the first, compose the Bill of Rights, the foundation of this nation's greatness and the real source of our security.

If the present situation lasts for a generation, as well it may, together with its formidable and direct attempt to restrict or eliminate the Bill of Rights in the name of security, then the next generation may not remember what their rights were.

There won't be anyone around to remember them or remind the next generation what they were. They may say that they eliminated or restricted them for your own good, and, besides, your forefathers and mothers voluntarily gave a lot of them up a generation ago.

So what is the Foundation for Open Government's mission? I think its prime purpose is to keep the public informed, to keep the government open and to preserve for the public their right to know. Its mission is to remind the people what has made this nation the greatest on Earth, especially why they should care, as well as why and how they can continue to preserve the Constitution and its magnificent Bill of Rights.

Those first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution are the real foundation for our freedom and liberty, our foundation for real security. It is the fundamental law which has made us the land of the free and the home of the brave. We have been that for over 200 years. Let's keep it that way.

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><

#748

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 4:32 am
Subject: ** By Getting J.A.I.L. Passed **

jail4judges@...

J.A.I.L. News Journal
_____________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California September 30, 2003

How is it we can ever have a free, true, honest and real trial again?

By Getting J.A.I.L. Passed

We received a response to our previous JNJ from Nick Jesson, whom many of you know. NJesson@... Following Nick's email is my response which we share with all of you, since it is so basic.

-Barbie-

----- Original Message -----

From: Nick Jesson

To: 'VictoryUSA@...'

Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 4:27 PM

Subject: RE: * * * J.A.I.L. Absolutely Unique * * *

What you stated makes sense, however you left out the fact that, now even the jury is stacked against each of us!! Our government today will do anything they can to win. Most juries today will have at least 3 F.B.I. agents and many government workers. Also the Judge now has a list of questions that he will ask each juries instead of the lawyers asking.

How is it we can ever have a free, true, honest and real trail again?

Sincerely, Nick.

-----Original Message-----
From: VictoryUSA@... [mailto:VictoryUSA@...]
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 1:40 PM
To: www.jail4judges.org
Subject: * * * J.A.I.L. Absolutely Unique * * *

J.A.I.L. News Journal
_____________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California September 28, 2003

J.A.I.L. Absolutely Unique

(By Ron Branson, Author/Founder)

"I believe trial by jury is the only anchor yet imagined by man which can hold a government to the principles of its constitution."

Perhaps no man influenced the infrastructure of the foundations of our new experiment known as a Constitutional Republic in America more so than did Thomas Jefferson. America history is rife with quotes of him, the above being no exception. Jefferson has received praise from all walks of life, and statues have been erected to him, including the Jefferson Memorial in Washington, D.C. There are even those who proclaim themselves to be "Jeffersonians."

After the order of Thomas Jefferson, and our other Founding Fathers, two-hundred and nineteen years later, (April, 1995), J.A.I.L. ("Judicial Accountability & Integrity Legislation") has come into existence on the American scene. While not yet recognized for its full value, it is as important as our original Constitution itself.

Now while some of you are picking yourself up from the floor where you have been laying and holding your chest while gasping for air, let me explain. There is absolutely no competition between the U.S. Constitution and J.A.I.L., for neither can be complete without the other. I know some of you are saying, "These are hard words," while others murmur "Treason," noting that our country has existed for over 200 years without the existence of J.A.I.L., and so we have.

But the fact remains, unless you have been living on another planet, that our Constitution, after 200 years of existence, has been reduced to just a piece of paper given political lip service, cited as authority only when it serves one's political agenda. All government officials, in theory, give solemn oath to it, pledging to uphold and defend it against all enemies, foreign and domestic, while few of these people have ever read it in their life, and even fewer understand it.

Thomas Jefferson said, "Let no more be heard of confidence in men, but rather bind them down by the chains of the Constitution." Most politicians accept the idea, as adopted by many judges in our courts today, that our Constitution was intended by our Founding Fathers to be rubberized, and those links of "chains to bind them down," spoken of by Thomas Jefferson, are made of elastic.

In the quote of Thomas Jefferson above, "I believe trial by jury is the only anchor yet imagined by man which can hold a government to the principles of its constitution," we note that the intent of Jefferson's words was holding government to the principles of the Constitution. He said, "I believe trial by jury is the only anchor yet imagined by man, and in 1776, he was correct. But then came along J.A.I.L. two centuries later as "another anchor imagined by man to hold government to the principles of the Constitution!"

In the days of Thomas Jefferson, he had a limited knowledge of options, and based thereon, he determined that a trial by jury was the only anchor imagined by man to hold government to the principles of the Constitution. Had Thomas Jefferson then been enlightened to the concept of J.A.I.L., notwithstanding its current title, history would doubtless record Thomas Jefferson as the author of J.A.I.L.

In fact, even in his day, Thomas Jefferson, disappointed in the lack of a provision in our current Constitution, was searching for some Constitutional measure, such as J.A.I.L., that would result in judicial accountability of judges. He said, "At the establishment of our Constitutions, the judiciary bodies were supposed to be the most helpless and harmless members of the government. Experience, however, soon showed us in what way they were to become the most dangerous; that the insufficiency of the means provided for their removal gave them a freehold and irresponsibility in office; that their decisions, seeming to concern individual suitors only, pass silent and unheeded by the public at large; that these decisions, nevertheless, become law by precedent, sapping little and little, the foundations of the Constitution, before anyone perceived that invisible and helpless worm had been busily employed in consuming its substance. In truth, man is not made to be trusted for life, if secured against all liability to account."

In the founding of our country, and in the providence of God Almighty working in hearts of our Founding Fathers, the revelation of J.A.I.L. was not yet to be revealed. But now in this generation, God, according to the good pleasure of His will, has chosen to reveal the concept of J.A.I.L. to this, and other nations.

Above I stated that J.A.I.L. was equally as important as is the original Constitution itself. How so? you say. It was Thomas Jefferson himself that expressed the lack of a means of security of the very Constitution he had a part in writing, stating that he feared the politically motivated Judiciary Industry would completely undermine the Constitution until it became just a worthless piece of paper.

Thomas Jefferson warned us as surely as if it were printed in today's newspapers, "...the Federal Judiciary; an irresponsible body (for impeachment is scarcely a scare-crow), working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing it's noiseless step like a thief, over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall be usurped from the States, and the government of all be consolidated into one. ... when all government ... in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the centre of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated." -- Thomas Jefferson, 1821.

So, we arrive at the question, which is of the greater value, the preservation of the principles of our original Constitution, or the means by which it is protected? They are inseparable, and neither can exist without the other. As a practical matter, everyone should respect the existence of J.A.I.L. as if it were authored by Thomas Jefferson himself, and I believe he would have been delighted to have his name associated with it. I realize it is hard to conceive of a document outside of the Constitution that is so important as is our Constitution itself, but God has now brought to light the revelation of J.A.I.L. to this nation, and calls upon America to support it for its very future's sake.

There are many groups, organizations, political parties, and coalitions with their own agendas throughout America which pay little or no attention to J.A.I.L. This does not concern me in the least, for I know by the Grace of God, one of these days all these causes will have to reckon with the validity of the value of J.A.I.L. being equal to that of our Constitution itself, and in that day we will have the opportunity to move in unity for the restitution of the government envisioned by Thomas Jefferson.

Those who wish to receive a copy of the "Judicial Accountability & Integrity Legislation" now being proposed to Congress, (also in the Library of Congress), may write to VictoryUSA@..., and we will be happy to email you a copy.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Nick:

Hi, this is Barbie writing. Ron asked me to respond to you since he had an appointment to meet this evening and didn't want to delay getting our response to you.

First, we're happy to hear from you again. We were troubled to hear about your recent arrest and glad to know that you again are able to communicate with us, and others, by email. We would be very interested to know what the status of your matter is. When I first heard about this situation, I immediately thought about Bob Schulz of We The People. Although he's involved with the federal problem, the states, especially California, follow the federal program. Like with everything else, the fraudulent tax system (state and federal) ultimately ends up in the courts.

In the final analysis, it's the COURTS that people have to deal with-- regardless of what agency is involved.

Second, I'll address your comments written in response to the JNJ "J.A.I.L. Absolutely Unique." You state: you left out the fact that, now even the jury is stacked against each of us!! Our government today will do anything they can to win. Nick, Ron didn't leave anything out of the substance of his article.

The substance of that article focuses on the following statement:

[Jefferson] said, "I believe trial by jury is the only anchor yet imagined by man, and in 1776, he was correct. But then came along J.A.I.L. two centuries later as "another anchor imagined by man to hold government to the principles of the Constitution!" Ron is not focusing on what government is doing today, or "now." The focus is on the time when the Constitution was created and what was intended by the Founding Fathers at that time for the future of the people and their posterity (us).

What the powers that be (ostensibly "government") is doing NOW is so far removed from what was intended at the time the Constitution was written, that it hardly bears mention, let alone credence, except to say that it must be corrected. The particulars of what's happening today is irrelevant-- focusing on the problem is the problem! Nick, we have a solution and that's what you should be focusing on!

Ron said before he left, "The whole problem with Nick is his focus. He has his mind stuck on the system today." Nick, it's like a mental disease- you have to get rid of it! It's eating you up-- destroying you! You are allowing the monster in power today to crush you, strangle you, smother you. Ron sincerely would like a chance to meet with you in person, at a time and place of your convenience, to discuss this matter. He feels that's the only way to release you from your mental entrapment, the strangle-hold that the evil forces have on you.

Despite the sufferings we must endure today, focus on the solution for tomorrow! J.A.I.L.'s uniqueness is that it focuses ONLY on the solution-- no other cause does that. Coming up with new ways to "fight the system" is NOT the solution to changing the system. And that's what has to be done. The people must do it-- the system will not correct itself. How can a corrupt tree produce good fruit? The entire system is corrupt and CANNOT produce justice! The corrupt tree (unaccountable judiciary) must be rooted out entirely, and an accountable judiciary "planted" in its place. That's what J.A.I.L. is designed to do.

Nick, we urge you not to concentrate on the corruption coming forth from the system today. That isn't helping you-- it's destroying you! Finally you ask How is it we can ever have a free, true, honest and real trial again? Another broader way of asking that question is "How can we restore justice in this country?" The answer is the same as we have been telling you--

Focus on getting J.A.I.L. passed as soon as possible!

In closing Nick, let Ron know when he can have that personal meeting with you. He really would like an opportunity to help you. He thinks a lot of you and doesn't like to see you going through such turmoil. Give him a chance, won't you? I think you'll be glad you did.

Sincerely,

-Barbie-

victoryusa@...

J.A.I.L.= Judicial Accountability Initiative Law - www.jail4judges.org
JAIL is a unique addition to our form of gov't. heretofore unrealized.
JAIL is powerful! JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope!
JAIL is taking America like a wildfire! AddRemove@...
JAIL is making inroads into Congress for federal accountability!
E-Groups sign on at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/join
Get involved at JAIL_SALE_USA-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Send donations to J.A.I.L., P.O. Box 207, N. Hollywood, CA 91603

"Those who say it cannot be done should not interfere with those of us who are doing it." --S. Hickman

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><

#749

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 4:18 am
Subject: Learning What "Law" Is About

jail4judges@...

J.A.I.L. News Journal
_____________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California October 1, 2003

Learning What "Law" Is About

In my years of promoting J.A.I.L. as the Author and Founder, I have found that my biggest job is de-educating people, i.e., eradicating from their memory that we are actually a nation of laws. Consequently, I have to keep repeating the same message over and over again.

I realize that people's thinking is that no one can play football without rules, so how can we run a country without rules. Their thinking is logical, so it appears I am asking people to ignore logic and common sense. Therefore, Ron must be crazy to suggest that our country is without rules to govern it, but is run by politics only. They will even open law books to show me the black-and-white law, and say, "Here it is right here," pointing to the law section, which proves they are incapable of comprehending what I am saying to them.

Does anyone remember the scene in George Orwell's book "1984" where four fingers are held up and the question asked of the man on the stretch rack, "How many fingers am I holding up?" If he answered "Four," or any other number, he got tortured. This continued until he got the right answer, which in the book was, "Whatever you want it to be." This precisely depicts how our country is run -- after the order of the book 1984!

So Ron Branson is either crazy, or if correct, all logic has been thrown to the wind, and our country is about to reap the whirlwind.

Below is the testimony of an Oregon JAILer who decided to enter law school so he could help himself and others in matters of law. What follows is the result.

----- Original Message -----

From: Lcagee@...

To: VictoryUSA@...

INSIDE REPORT FROM OUR NATIONS LAW SCHOOLS

By Lawrence Agee, - Lcagee@...

I am now in my 3rd year of law school. I landed here because I was swindled out of large sums of money by crooked lawyers on several occasions. Today, I learned more disturbing facts about our legal system.

After sitting through several lectures on white collar crime, I asked my instructor what the victim of white collar crime is supposed to do. I related a case of mail fraud that was inflicted upon me that resulted in an $8,300 swindle.

I remember going to the police and getting brushed off. They wouldn't listen to me. I didn't know what to do. I was forced to hire a lawyer. He charged me $20,000 and lost. Not only did the con get away with $8,300 (aided and abetted by a lawyer), I had to pay "my" lawyer $20,000 for the privilege of being robbed.

Then, the judge told me I had to pay the person who swindled me $2,500 because I "lost." My lawyer, who dumped me off on another lawyer the day before trial, must have laughed all the way to the bank. When I told him I wanted to appeal, he brushed me off. I went to find an appellate lawyer who said he could take my case, but needed a $25,000 retainer.

I did it myself. I worked on it for one year. When I got to court, there were 30-40 appeals on the docket that morning. One minute into my oral argument, I was cut off. The judgment was "affirmed" and I was out $50,000. (I later saw on the JAIL website the judge who heard my case was sued for Racketeering for throwing cases).

I asked my instructor why the DA or the US Attorney wouldn't prosecute this. He said it was "too small of a case." Then I asked what the "threshold" level was where the US Attorney will begin to listen. He said, somewhere in the $70,000 and up range. He said this with a straight face.

I pondered this answer, and I am really quite upset. What he is saying is that we (i.e. the US government) will prosecute a crime only when the US Attorney wants to, and will act only if you were defrauded out of $70,000 or more.

I realized that all of us poor suckers who actually believed in "equal protection under the law" have been duped. We only get equal protection when we get cheated out of a large enough sum of money to hit the "threshold."

In other words, for the experienced con artist, they realize they have a blank check to rob us, so long as they keep the amounts under $70,000. They know that the US Attorneys and DAs are simply too lazy to act. In other words, if you are rich, then the government will protect you. If not, they won't. I find this double standard offensive.

The lesson learned by Lawrence Agee as stated above is indeed shocking, but he still has not been given the truth. He was told that the financial threshold is $70,000. But if his case exceeded the $70,000 threshold, his outcome would have been no different, for he has not been given the straight-forward truth, even after three years of law school.

The threshold is not $70,000 or $70 million, etc. The correct answer is "Whatever they want it to be." The variables are, "Who is it that you know?" "How much influence do you have?" "How much is in it for the grantor?" etc, etc. The bottom line is that there is no bottom line, for there is no rule of law that governs our country -- just politics.

There will be no rule of law governing this country until after the passage and enforcement of J.A.I.L.

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><

#750

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Fri Oct 10, 2003 3:06 am
Subject: Who Said Judicial Commissions Are Worthless?

jail4judges@...

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-briefs29.4sep29,0,4278442.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

J.A.I.L. News Journal
_____________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California October 9, 2003

Who Said Judicial Commissions Are Worthless?

More and more people are saying that the Investigative Judicial Commissions in the fifty states are worthless, and are covering up for corrupt judges, rather that investigating, exposing and reprimanding them. Well, surprise! This J.A.I.L. News Journal is written to come to their defense.

Okay, I know you smell a rat, and think something is wrong, so I may as well come clean. I just can't resist the opportunity to mock them even when they try to make themselves look worthy of their existence.

"Thou Shalt Not

Make Love To Prosecutors!"

We've all heard accusations that the judges were in bed with the prosecutors. Well, Virgil Langley, one of our readers, has sent the following introductory comment and article to us:

It takes the strangest things to remove a judge from the bench in Arizona. For the first time ever, a Superior Court Judge may be removed from the bench. The issue -- Thou shalt not make love to the prosecutors!

Due to the fact that I am unable to resist, I am going to emphasize certain points in the below by using bold italics, and make comments within brackets. -Ron

State panel urges judge be removed

Affair, assault on wife, taint Superior Court, report says.

Carol Sowers
The Arizona Republic
Aug. 15, 2003

For the first time in its 31-year history, a state judicial ethics commission recommended Thursday that a Superior Court judge be kicked off the bench for shaming the profession, including assaulting his wife and having a love affair with a prosecutor.

A seven-member panel of the Commission on Judicial Conduct said in its report that Judge Michael C. Nelson of Apache County should be removed "for bringing his judicial office into disrepute and for violations of the code of judicial conduct."

[What is so shocking here is how Arizona has maintained such saintly judges over the past 31 years since the creation of the original Commission on Judicial Conduct. This is absolutely amazing! With such a good judicial record, one might even wonder why in the world they bothered creating this commission 31 years ago.

But finally, after the taxpayers have paid out millions of "moola" over the past 31 years of this commission's existence, it finally pays off for them with a dividend of "one" Superior Court Judge. (This, of course, assumes they actually go through with this judge's removal.)

Perhaps this commission will rate two Superior Court Judges before Haley's Comet returns on its 64 year cycle. Has it dawned upon anyone in Arizona that it would be a lot cheaper, and just as effective if they just let the judges fall over dead off the bench by attrition?]

Thomas Zlaket, recent chief justice of Arizona and Nelson's attorney, could not be reached for comment. However, during the commission's two-day hearing last month, Zlaket said Nelson had made errors in judgment but is one of the state's best jurists.

[What's this? "Nelson ... is one of the state's best jurists?" Arizona should not be removing their best jurists. Perhaps they better reconsider this action.]

Ron Wood an Apache County lawyer who testified at the July hearing, agreed that Nelson was an excellent judge and said he would appear before him again.

.....

Thou Shalt Not Threaten Thy Fellow Supreme Court Justice

Los Angeles Times

September 29, 2003

IN BRIEF / MISSISSIPPI
Judge Is Under Review in Alleged Threats

From Times Wire Reports

A judicial review board has launched an inquiry into allegations against a state Supreme Court justice, including claims that he threatened to "whip" the chief justice and intentionally delayed cases as payback before his term on the court ends.

The complaint, dated Sept. 17, charges that since his election defeat, Justice Chuck McRae has threatened violence against Chief Justice Edwin Pittman, saying he would "whip" him, and on more than one occasion "cursed at staff and colleagues and has screamed at fellow justices."

McRae came in last in a three-way race last fall. His term ends in January.

So, next time you hear anyone demeaning any one of the fifty state's Judicial Commissions, you might cite them to this evidence that they are not worthless.

Seriously, now, the passage of J.A.I.L. will entirely embarrass all the 50 state's Judicial Commissions, forcing them to get busy attempting to show themselves worthy of their existence. And I should also state here that J.A.I.L. does not seek to replace any of the Judicial Commissions. Their purposes are distinct. For instance, let's say a judge is sitting up on the bench smoking and making snide sexual remarks to his clerk, and there are no laws on the books that says, "Thou shalt not smoke and/or make snide sexual remarks from the bench," then the State's Judicial Commissions would be the appropriate forum to direct such a complaint. J.A.I.L. only deals with willful and deliberate violations of the law, the Constitution, and due process, etc.

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><

#751

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Tue Oct 14, 2003 8:41 am
Subject: JAIL Provides a Proper Balance of Empowering Citizens

jail4judges@...

J.A.I.L. News Journal
_____________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California October 14, 2003

JAIL Provides a Proper Balance of Empowering Citizens

(By Tim Peters, Oregon JAILer, psr@...)

----- Original Message -----

From: Tim Peters

To: VictoryUSA@...

Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2003 8:04 PM

Subject: Re: Jake Addresses "Patriot"

JAIL seems to be a proper, balanced empowering that the citizens need, it is not so extreme as an American or French Revolution, and the 'Patriot' is wrong. Jefferson and the boys, as he puts it, did ask, beg, plead, demand before they ever resorted to a revolution.

JAIL has the potential to deal with the wrongs we presently suffer in our courts and from our government. JAIL is our chance to save us from extreme measures becoming a necessity.

And if we are too blind to see the value of JAIL, what good will a new American revolution bring? ...none...just a lot of blood and greater heartache.

Tim

Quote below from the original message is what I refer to ...

I'll just point something out to you that needs no proof. Unlike JAIL, Thomas Jefferson and the boys didn't ask; they prepared to shake, make, and take. The Founding Fathers empowered themselves. They were the real thing.

JAIL, on the other hand, is very similar to a High School Student Council.

Patriot

patriot@...

Ron Touches On The issue:

To all those who resolve revolution to be the better answer for America's future, it must be pointed out, even accepting their contentions to be true, we would still need to adopt J.A.I.L. in America post-revolution as is evident by what has now happened to our country since the first American revolution took place by those whom "Patriot" addresses as "the real thing." Are those of us who seek a peaceable resolution prior to the commencement of blood shed, "not the real thing?"

(Believe it or not, J.A.I.L. has been called a deception inflicted upon the People because it suggests American can avert complete anarchy through the peaceable means of J.A.I.L. Yes, there are those whose mind is totally set on violence, all violence, and nothing but violence for the future of this nation.)

I just don't believe our Founding Fathers would have chosen revolution over the peaceable option of J.A.I.L. which we do have today, if the identical option were available to them in the 1770s. They had no options -- we do. The question is, will we avail ourselves of it? Are we to avert all attempts to pass J.A.I.L. and go straight for revolution? I think not.

Ron Branson

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><

#752

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Wed Oct 15, 2003 1:18 am
Subject: Can Resolving The Judicial Issue Resolve Other Issues?

jail4judges@...

J.A.I.L. News Journal
_____________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California October 14, 2003

Can Resolving The Judicial Issue

Resolve Other Issues?

(By Janell Kirkland, tarzpurz1@..., new CO. JAILer)

From: Janell Kirkland

To: VictoryUSA@...

Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 11:13 PM

Subject: Re: * * * J.A.I.L. Absolutely Unique * * *

....

I fully support your agenda. However, I really am confused regarding whether or not you really believe that targeting ONLY judges, will somehow "fix" all the other "criminals" in uniform and in positions of authority and power who continue to destroy our country and the lives of private citizens.

At the risk of sounding clich�, it's time to remind the citizens of this country that WE are the government; that "Freedom Isn't Free"; that if our corrupt system is to be rectified, millions of citizens need to make their concerns known; and ACT upon them.

This is what it will take to first contain and then the process of identifying ALL of the "system criminals", holding them accountable, or outing their butts, and redefining the principles and procedures upon which the "system" is intended to function.

Janell Kirkland

tarzpurz1@...

Ron Branson Responds:

As the Author of J.A.I.L., although I believe I was moved upon by divine intervention to write J.A.I.L. in its original form in a two-day period, I did not come up with the concept out of the sky blue, lacking experience and knowledge, as though my fingers just automatically moved upon the keyboard as if driven by a force. I had to learn my enemy by suffering the long and hard rocky road of years of rebuttals, denials, shame, lies, torture and oppression.

I do definitely believe, however, that all these things worked out for good by the Hand of God to educate me regarding the wiles of evil and darkness in high places. When I started years ago, (around 1981) I was just the same as everyone else, i.e., disgusted over government injustice inflicted upon me, and I began to go into the courts seeking, and fully expecting, redress of grievances addressed. That was the only logical thing I had left when I saw that appealing to the City and the County of Los Angeles was getting me nowhere. (Yes, I thought in the beginning that even my enemies had some scruples of right and wrong, and that they knew we had laws that governed the affairs of our life, and that they could somehow be reasoned with.) But now I understand what George Washington was stating when he said, "Government is not reason. Government is not eloquence. It is force; and, like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master!"

Those were my naive days in the early 80s when I actually thought my redress was to be found in those who eventually became known to me as my prosecutors. When I say "prosecutors" what I mean is that those from whom I sought relief eventually became the defense for the government agency which I had to sue. Eventually, they would turn the whole case around in court by the help of the judges to make me the defense and them the prosecutors, while on paper, I was the plaintiff of the action. (Attorney Linda Kennedy, WBFLegal@..., has done an excellent exposition on this phenomenon in her Holodeck Law series, with which I was totally unfamiliar at that time.)

Every time I sued a government agent or agency, it was the judges who invariably came to their rescue every time without fail. After repeated attempts of seeking redress against government officials, I began to learn the ropes, and discovered that the problem in society was not corrupt government officials, but judges who covered for these corrupt government officials. This premise is what became likened to me as an out-of-control spoiled kid who is consoled and rewarded by their mother every time the kid did evil. I used to blame cops for being out of control, but I had to learn that they were only doing what the courts were allowing them to get away with, and even rewarding them for their evil.

This education took me to the next step of learning to sue corrupt judges, who covered for corrupt government officials, who oppressed everyone, which acts depressed all society, but I was met with the blockage of judicial immunity. Every time I sued a judge, he hid behind judicial immunity, which I learned was not really judicial immunity as set forth in law, but was actually in practice "absolute immunity," i.e., the judge can do no wrong.

Through years of suing judges and seeking to overcome their "so-called" judicial immunity doctrine defense, I became a expert on the subject. Then came my final law course. I had to learn that law has absolutely no meaning whatsoever, and that was my problem. I had been thinking that the law was the law, and one could count upon the law as defined by judges in the law books. What I was finding, however, was that no matter how clear the law was, or the cases defining those laws by the courts, not one thing could be relied upon as an established truth in fact or law, whether you were the plaintiff or the defendant.

I had to learn that I was playing in a chess game in which my opponent was making up the rules as we progressed. No matter how cunning I got, when I trapped my opponent up against the wall with absolutely no place to go, they just played a "Houdini" and declared there was no such wall and played off the chess board. I tested this theory many, many times. It was the lesson that was to be indelibly hammered into my skull, to wit, you just will never win in pursuit of redress of grievances in our current judicial system. (If one does, it is not because of the legal skills in law, but because even Las Vegas needs someone to win their money on occasion, otherwise no one would ever gamble in Vegas.)

Unwilling to accept the concept that there was absolutely nowhere in government that anyone could go for redress. I went everywhere, including the California State Legislature, the Attorney General, the Governor, Congress, the FBI, the Justice Department, and even to the President himself, none of which offered a solution, but completely ignored me.

Several petitions of grievances now rest with Congress, which I sincerely believe they merely discarded, even though I offered to come before them personally with a crew of attorneys. J.A.I.L. was born out of petitioning heaven.

So now you ask me if I "really believe that targeting ONLY judges, will somehow 'fix' all the other 'criminals' in uniform...?" to which I respond positively, "Absolutely and unequivocally Yes!" I not only believe it will, but I know it will from my years of real and practical experience, and I further know that redress will be by no other means.

Does my experience make me a "hard man?" Yes it does, but I know we must deal with reality, not fantasies or wishful thinking, and delusions of grandeur of redress of grievances through other means. And I know that I must bear the put-downs of those I must slap across the face with the unpleasant fact of reality that there is no other way.

Thanks for asking your question that puts truth to the test. God bless you.

-Ron Branson-

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><

#753

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Fri Oct 24, 2003 10:51 pm
Subject: * * * Government's Concern Over Elder Abuse * * *

jail4judges@...

J.A.I.L. News Journal
_____________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California October 24, 2003

Government's Concern

Over Elder Abuse

(By Ruth Howard, har@...)

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widow' houses, and for pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation." Matthew 23:14.

What you are about to read is horrifying, and if you think about this woman as your own mother, it is even more frightening. -Ron Branson

~ ~ ~

I am happy for Terri, [the Florida patient whom the court ordered the removal of her feeding tube,] but something needs to be done about guardians and conservators.

I was working on a case as a advocate for an 85-yr-old woman, that was in good health and of sound mind. The county in which I live are taking elderly women, locking them into a nursing home, melting down their assets and property to pay the nursing home costs. Then, when the money is used up, they are placing them into a retirement home on state aid.

This woman I was helping sends me magnificent letters; and tried to call me on the phone, but she is not allowed to use the phone. [Even an arrestee in custody is permitted to make a telephone call. -ed.] She tells me what they are doing to her. I checked out what she told me and found it to be the truth. The conservator will not even allow her to leave the nursing home to go to church, have visitors; and I was barred from seeing her by her court-appointed conservator.

I received an email from the nursing home director telling me I cannot come to visit this woman by the order of the conservator. The county DHS kidnapped her off her porch, while her five-year companion, age 55, was shaving in the bathroom. When he came out and could not find her, he was given a summons for a restraining order to keep him away from the home and his companion, based on false allegations from a DHS social worker. He was thrown out into the street, not allowed to get his personal belongings, tools, car, etc. was arrested seven times for walking down any street in town, based on false allegations of violating the restraining order. It was all finally dropped when I stepped in to investigate.... I stepped in and tried to help, but I cannot stop all the political crimes by myself. There are no psychological reports, no doctor in court-- only lies from the conservator appointed by DHS as a emergency guardian, who then months later becomes the conservator.

The director of the nursing home is also newly appointed to the city as
an Alderman. Looks like and smells like a conflict of interest to me. A big developer got her river property; her other six properties were sold; two trailer houses given away by the conservator to his buddy that owns a retirement home into which he wants to put her. Then I went over to the trash hauler and found a copy of the bills from the real estate man's business that sold her house on the lake. He threw away her personal belongings by order of the conservator.

She cried so pitifully telling me how they threw away her keepsakes,
pictures and clothes and stole her antiques and homes. She has been locked into the nursing home without her purse, slippers and robe, and

personal belongings of any kind. ...

The woman sold real estate all her life, and could sell real estate today.
She is sharp-- not senile as they would like to make everyone believe....

I called in the Ombudsman, the State Attorney, and no one cares to stop this crime. The county lost so much funding in the last two years, they have developed a new way to recoup their operating money for the county, by placing older women in nursing homes and melting down their assets, so they are eligible for state Medicaid and housing for the elderly.

This lady wanted to go home. She cried when she found they sold her mom and dad's home she inherited. ... She has been locked in this nursing home since last September. She told me there are many other older women in the same situation in the nursing home. I have been barred from visiting anyone in the nursing home. It seems they are scared of me, as I know what they are up to. (Their political agenda is so obvious).

I volunteer my services as a state-trained advocate for people with
disabilities and the elderly. If I were to bill the state for my advocacy,
this would put me out of work. According to the MN state rules and statutes, they cannot keep anyone in a nursing home for more than 90 days in a calendar year. She has been there for 13 months consecutively.

This is the dirtiest and most criminal thing that can be done to our
elders; DHS, court-appointed attorneys, and the emergency guardian lied threw their teeth in court, locked her up and sold her assets, no due process of law. There are no civil rights or Constitution followed in this country for the elderly, sick, and disabled.

It seems it's an open field for any opportunist to take advantage of
anyone they want to, and especially if they work for county or state
government.

We need to gather all the human and civil rights violations and post
them for all to read and send them to the legislators, so they can see how they are destroying our country with state statutes that eliminate our rights everyday. The perversion of the Constitution is in every state in every legislative state capital. Every year they whittle away more of our rights and freedoms with statutes that are not even in the Constitution. ...

It makes me laugh when I remember how so important public schools made seniors think the Constitution was, and mandatory before they graduate, "only if they pass the Constitution they teach in high school."
I remember quite clearly what was required and taught; it is no way, shape, or form to what the Constitution really means and represents. Funny we never studied the amendments.

This problem is much larger than anyone can imagine, Partners n Policymaking List Serve has many parents coming forward with violations by the thousands across this country.

Ruth Howard

har@...

The best way to predict the future is to create it. Its time the sheep stand up and develop their spine.

The above account reminds us of net fishing, dragging in the daily catch, skinning and filleting them. This government behavior will halt once J.A.I.L. becomes the law of this Land by calling the judges to account to the Constitution. Remember this experience next time you hear the government cry crocodile tears in expressing their concern for elder abuse. We are now seeing "Stop Elder Abuse" posters on the side of our Public Transit Busses here in Los Angeles. This is what they are talking about.

By way of my own personal experience, I was shopping in the market the other day picking through the bananas when up walks a woman and does likewise. We struck into a friendly conversation, and she told me that she has to get back to work. I asked her what kind of work she does, and she told me that she was a real estate agent. I said, "Oh, you work for a realitor company!" She said no, I own the company. Then came the shocker. She told me she was ninety years old, and I like to have fell on the floor. She didn't wear glasses, she walked straight upright without a cane, and was as sound of a mind as myself. I asked for her business card, and she dug in her purse and gave it to me. She lives not far from me. I would have estimated her to be about seventy.

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><

#754

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Sat Oct 25, 2003 11:52 pm
Subject: ** Rogues in Robes **

jail4judges@...

J.A.I.L. News Journal
_____________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California October 25, 2003

Rogues In Robes

Real change will come ... only when the people are sufficiently organized to speak out in SOLIDARITY in opposition to the

"Rogues in Robes." -- David Donley

Cecile M. Allcock gemni@... writes to Dave Donley, Vermont JAILer-In-Chief, the following:

Hi,

You don't know me, but I read a letter you wrote for a meeting Feb. 2003. It was found by a family member. Wish we were there. Hope things went well.

Anyway, to get to the point, we would love to be a part of your organization. I have been trying and fighting alone for years. It is refreshing to hear someone else out there saying the same things. We
have lost all our rights, but few out there will fight back. The cost is so
great that they are afraid to fight.

This is our (Friend and Family's ) belief: We have a new Mafia- we call it the BLUE MAFIA (Police) who work for the INJUSTICE SYSTEM. It is a corporate system. If justice is to be found, then it is paid for with lots of money. Job security [exists] for those who abuse the power.

If you believe the same and more, then we will be there whenever you need; and maybe we can win this war for freedom-- the one our ancestors fought for us to make us free-- [culminating in] our Bill of Rights and the Constitution.

There IS POWER IN THE PEOPLE, but the people must yell together in order to make our voices heard. Alone, we will only win or lose small battles; but we are losing the war.

Cecile M. Allcock gemni@...

(Response from Dave Donley):

Hi Cecile:

I thank you for your endorsement and welcomed offer of support. I do believe you will find we share many value "systems." Many make the analogy you do regarding the Mafia and government authorities.

I have posed the question in articles for the Children's Rights Council, "what is the distinction between the Mafia that shakes down legitimate businesses for 'protection money' and the courts which plunder and pillage everyone forcing them to pay to protect basic Constitutional rights and 'purchase' justice?" We pay for the courts with our tax dollars. Yet the BAR Associations have turned them into "money mills" for the legal fraternity, less concerned with truth and justice and more concerned with generating business for the "system."

Our whole system of justice has been subverted, but I don't think it is hopeless as long as there are those of us who realize as you have recognized, "There IS POWER IN THE PEOPLE but the people must yell together in order to make our voices heard. Alone we will only win or lose small battles, but we are losing the war." You understand more about the remedy for the corruption that prevails in our courts and government than many law school graduates, lawyer -wanna-bes,
habitual litigants, legislators and would-be social engineers.

There are many groups forming in direct response to the abuses being heaped upon us all. We all have the same common enemy "corrupt judges" that refuse to honor their oaths to "uphold the Constitution" and the people's rights as opposed to the "system's" agenda. I only wish more people would understand as you do.

I have been able to cost a few of the miscreants their positions, but it doesn't change the "system." That is why I advocate for JAIL4judges legislation. There are a lot of people trying to change the courts with the
courts and their one-in-a-million case. They never realize they are only feeding the beast by providing it more business, respect and credence than deserved. They are knocking on the wrong door, asking the thief
that stole their rights to "pretty please" give them back. Real change will come from the legislative forum and then only when the people are sufficiently organized to speak out in SOLIDARITY in opposition to the "Rogues in Robes."

JAIL4judges legislation provides a remedy. The group, for all intents and purposes, should be the common ground for all to gather and work from, because it would create ACCOUNTABILITY where we all need it for all our various issues - IN THE COURTS. Peruse the articles at both
their web sites www.jail4judges.org and NET (where past articles are archived-- there are articles dealing with every issue) providing many reasons why this Nation needs Judicial Accountability Legislation.

Sincere Regards,

David Donley, JIC

VT JAIL4judges

davedonley@...

The Criminal Justice System Big Business":
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/514

"Federal Judge Downplays Official Corruption":
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/683

"Everything Funnels Down To The Courts":
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/742

#755

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Sun Oct 26, 2003 4:14 am
Subject: * * * Hacking at the Branches * * *

jail4judges@...

J.A.I.L. News Journal
_____________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California October 25, 2003

Hacking at the Branches

(By Ron Branson, J.A.I.L. Author/Founder VictoryUSA@...)

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." - Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) This quote has been in the signature of J.A.I.L. for years.

Below, I am going to come very close to home and potentially step on the toes of some of those who know me, so I graciously ask that no one become personally offended. I just have to make my point with real life instances, and not make-believe.

In our neighborhood there was a tree that grew very tall. In its growing process, it did nearly a thousand dollars worth of damage to a sewer fifty to sixty feet from its base. This sewer, then made more accessible through openings placed in at the time of the repairs, had to be constantly cleaned of tree roots. The tree grew over the neighbor's house, and substantial limbs had to be hacked off and hauled away. This tree continued to grow, and more limbs had to be hacked off and hauled away.

This tree's growth then interfered with the gas meter, necessitating moving the meter, followed by lifting the sidewalk eighteen inches. More limbs were hacked off as it continued to grow uncontrollably. It's massive boughs then grew into the rafters, necessitating cutting a gouge out of the roof line. Then finally, it began to lift the foundation of the building.

Despite all the years of hacking at the limbs, this tree continued to grow wider and higher than ever, and choked out a tree that used to tower twenty-five feet over it. The decision was finally made that there was no choice but to go for the roots. This was done, and thus was the end of all the problems created by this tree.

How many times have we heard the cry, "Someone's Got To Do Something!" Now there are two inconclusive nouns in this statement: "Someone" and "Something." Just who is this "Someone?" It implies an entity other than the one speaking, i.e., some other person. Thus, someone other than myself has got to do something.

Then there is that word, "Something." It indicates nothing in particular, but take a stab at something, to wit, "take a shot in the dark." It is sort of like one flailing at sea, and grabbing at a straw floating by.

How oft I see people flailing without direction looking for "Something" they know not. I once attended a court proceeding as an observer in which one of my acquaintances was skinned and filleted by the federal judge mercilessly. Outside the federal court, I asked when are you people going to wake up and quit trying these arguments that get you nowhere but in trouble? To that came a response that they must continue to try everything until they have found something that works. Now there's that word, "Something." I responded, "Yes, try everything but J.A.I.L.!" I point out here that the definition of insanity is to keep trying the same things repeatedly expecting a different result.

Today, frustrated people from Los Angeles, and 134 other cities throughout this nation, are gathering this very day, October 25th, in the mall in Washington, D.C. in hopes of doing "Something" at catching the ears of Congress. These multitudes of people have all paid out money to board buses days ago for this event, but will they prevail today? Now we could debate the issue of whether they will be successful in catching the ears of Congress, but I raise the more basic question, "What if they do catch their ears, so what?" Their noble cause, "Stopping The War In Iraq." Even if we were to stop, or "undo" the war, would that be the solution to America's problems? No way! There is here spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to stop the war -- but behold, a greater cause than stopping the war is here!

Today, in the northern part of this country, people paid at the door to hear all about the money government has hidden from the people in secret bank accounts. But even if these people were successful in getting the government to "fess up" and come forward with all this money hidden in secret accounts, would that solve our greater problem? No way! These people have spent money on a seminar to dig out information on secret bank accounts -- but behold, a greater cause than secret bank accounts is here!

This very day, at a place not far from here, people lined up at the door to pay $100 each to try "Something" to keep all their legal issues out of court. This "Something" has proven time and time again not to work, but has repeatedly gotten innocent people in trouble, such as the one I spoke of earlier who got skinned and filleted by the Federal judge. But do they learn? No way! But they just have to keep trying through the U.C.C. -- but behold, there is a cause greater than the U.C.C. here! (U.C.C. = Uniform Commercial Code).

One week from today there will be a gathering of conservatives on an estate where innumerable fundraiser causes have taken place, to hear famous conservatives speak. It will provide a great social gathering where conservatives can "Meet, Greet, Eat, and Retreat." Many of my friends and acquaintances will be there. This is not free, of course, and I don't begrudge them from enjoying this opportunity. I wouldn't mind going myself even if it were just for the social benefits, but the greater questions remains, will these speeches, and these "meet, greet, eat, and retreat" festivals restore freedom to our country? No way! We spend money on "meet, greet, eat, and retreat" festivals -- but behold, a greater cause than all these conservative "meet, greet, eat, and retreat" festivals in this country is here!

We all remember the famous jingle sang by Little Orphan Annie, "Tomorrow, tomorrow, tomorrow, You're only a day away." One of our JAILers who is a dear precious friend of mine, has asked, "Ron, can't we do something else while we are waiting for J.A.I.L.?" This is just the problem: "Waiting for J.A.I.L." Human nature, as I have said above, is to hack away at the branches of the tree of evil, rather than striking at the roots. All the while the people are kept occupied with hacking at the branches, the tree of corruption continues to grow stronger, greater and taller than ever. In fact, the harder we work, the behinder we get. May I ask, are you satisfied with the direction this country is going, despite all the hacking taking place?

One long-standing life member of a nationwide organization that has been in operation for near forty-five years, which concentrates upon writing your Congressmen and Senators, said she is finding their members getting discouraged with their lack of progress. They are finding that things are no better today than they were forty-five years ago.

Folks, we deceive ourselves if we think that hacking at the branches (i.e., keeping busy doing "Something") is going to solve America's problems. You see, most everyone in America is frustrated and confused, and is on the defensive, and they wind up confusing their action with progress. Action is not progress! You can jump on a stationary bike and peddle away, but you will go nowhere. On our home webpage, www.jail4judges.org, we say, "Today is the Day of J.A.I.L.!" It is not "Tomorrow!"

We've all heard the famous quote, "If not Me, who? If not Now, when?" Dear friends, You are the One! Now is the Time! It is frustrating to me to see that all we need in order to pass J.A.I.L. is already within our grasp. "We have met the enemy, and the enemy is us!" (Famous quote, author unknown) Goethe said, there's nothing so fearful as ignorance in action. We ourselves are the only thing that prevents us from a clear and decisive Victory Now! We can get J.A.I.L. on the ballot NOW if we will but grasp it. No waiting! Now is the time, and YOU are the person!

God has already informed this nation of its greatest danger, "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee." Hosea 4:6. People pray for God's intervention, yet they know not when He has answered their prayers. They have to "Keep trying everything." Something, Anything, Everything! etc, etc. ad nauseam.

There are a thousand good things you can do for your country, dear ones, but there is but one Best! Thus, beware of "Good Things," for "Good Things" has always been the greatest enemy of "The Best!" Therefore, "Good Things" can destroy your country and your entire future.

"The saddest epitaph which can be carved in memory of a vanished
liberty is that it was lost because its possessors failed to stretch
forth a saving hand while yet there was time."

- George Sutherland (1938)

"If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed, if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not so costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no chance of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves."

-- Winston Churchill

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><

#756

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Wed Oct 29, 2003 2:08 am
Subject: Targeting JAILess Expose's

jail4judges@...

J.A.I.L. News Journal
_____________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California October 28, 2003

Targeting JAILess Expos�s

More and more articles and radio talk show hosts today are targeting judicial corruption. This is very good. However, while these men acknowledge the need for some sort of judicial accountability, they are either failing or refusing to acknowledge the existence of J.A.I.L., much less it's proposal.

This vacuum has created a market around the nation to kindly kick the butts of these publishers and talk show hosts, placing them on the Hot Seat. For instance, although J.A.I.L. has been presented to Bill O'Rielly a number of times by email and call-in guests, (he's on the J.A.I.L. mailings also) when Bill presented a "JAILess expos�" the other day, one of his listeners asked him what he proposed as a remedy. Here was Bill's golden opportunity to mention the existence of JAIL4Judges, however, his response was, "I don't know." This "I don't know" response enraged another listener who called him on the carpet for not mentioning JAIL4Judges.

One might think that when all these publishers and radio talk show hosts start presenting "JAILess expos�" find themselves kicked in the butt every time, they will either start mentioning JAIL4Judges on their shows and in their written articles, or refuse to talk or write about this subject altogether.

I really doubt they can seriously do the latter, so the challenge for them is whether these authorities on this subject can sneak out a "JAILess expos�" without being called on the carpet for it.

Below is Rev Lou Sheldon's "JAILess expos�" of the courts, and his being caught and kicked in the butt for doing so. I endorse this conduct as good policy and practice for all people everywhere so long as it is done honorably, kindly and in good taste. So I advocate everyone keep a sharp ear out for "JAILess expos�s" of the courts. I recommend it as a sort of "Simon Says" every time a expose of the courts comes up.

Rev. Sheldon's email is lou.sheldon@.... Hey, let's face it, J.A.I.L. is headed for domination of this nation anyway, so go ahead and have some good clean fun with this.

-Ron Branson

----- Original Message -----

From: The NetProphet

To: tvcwashdc@...

Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2003 1:54 PM

Subject: Re: 2 Special Reports from TVC...

I appreciate all of your material, but find your paper on solutions for judicial tyranny absolutely preposterous. You make not one mention of www.jail4judges.org, which is in practice the ONLY way judicial tyranny will end. It just ain't gonna happen any other way. I don't understand how you don't get this? CONgress, the courts, and the executive branch ARE the problem. The only way this insanity is going to stop is when J.A.I.L. is the law of the land, period. Shame on you for not getting on board with J4J! You call yourself a beacon for righteousness? Prove it! Show me! Get on board with J4J before you confuse those who might otherwise want to take action, or get out of the way. We don't need any false prophets (no pun intended).

God Bless and Kindest Regards,

Pete
"aka The NetProphet"

----- Original Message -----

From: Rev Lou Sheldon

To: TVCNews - TVC's National Newsletter

Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2003 9:45 PM

Subject: 2 Special Reports from TVC...

Judges: Our Robed Masters
A Call To End Judicial Tyranny!
Renegade judges ignore the Constitution to impose their own political ideologies on American citizens and culture. We must stop them!

The 9th Circuit Court Must Be Split!

Congress must free 56 million people from the judicial tyranny of liberal federal judges on the 9th Circuit Court in California.

Download these two
Special PDF Reports.

Read them, share them!

REPORT #1
Judges: Our Robed Masters
http://traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=getit&lid=64
REPORT #2
The 9th Circuit Court Must Be Split!
http://traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=getit&lid=67

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><

#757

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Tue Nov 11, 2003 7:22 am
Subject: Ten Truths of Tyranny

jail4judges@...

J.A.I.L. News Journal
_____________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California November 10, 2003

Ten Truths of Tyranny

by Matt Giwer

1.) Any law the electorate sees as being open to being perverted

from its original intent will be perverted in a manner that exceeds

the manner of perversion seen at the time.

2.) Any law that is so difficult to pass it requires the citizens be

assured it will not be a stepping stone to worse laws, will in fact

be a stepping stone to worse laws.

3.) Any law that requires the citizens be assured the law does not

mean what the citizens fear, means exactly what the citizens fear.

4.) Any law passed in a good cause will be interpreted to apply to

causes against the wishes of the people.

5.) Any law enacted to help any one group will be applied to harm

people not in that group.

6.) Everything the government says will never happen, will happen.

7.) What the government says it could not foresee, the government has

planned for.

8.) When there is a budget shortfall to cover non-essential

government services, the citizens will be given the choice between

higher taxes or the loss of essential government services.

9.) Should the citizens mount a successful effort to stop a piece of

legislation, the same legislation will be passed under a different

name.

10.) All deprivations of freedom and choice will be increased rather

than reversed.

"Find out just what people will submit to, and you have found the exact amount of injustice and wrongdoing which will be imposed on them; and these will continue until they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress." - Frederick Douglas, 1857

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><

#758

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 1:25 am
Subject: * J.A.I.L. Founder To Speak At WTP Conference *

jail4judges@...

http://www.givemeliberty.org/convention/agenda.htm

J.A.I.L. News Journal
_____________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California December 1, 2003

J.A.I.L. Founder To Speak At

WTP Conference January 22-24

We The People Foundation For

Constitutional Education, Inc.

2458 Ridge Road, Queensbury, NY 12804

November 20, 2003

Mr. Ron Branson

J.A.I.L. For Judges

11304 Chandler Blvd., #207

North Hollywood, California 91603

Dear Ron:

I am both proud and pleased to extend this formal invitation to you to participate as a speaker in "Give Me Liberty 2004," the first annual conference sponsored by the WTP organization. The three-day conference will be held January 22-24 in Arlington, Virginia.

The central theme of the conference is "The Right to Petition for Redress: Re-discovering the 'capstone' Right." The conference structure will feature six 2-3 hour panel discussions covering the history, nature and contemporary application of this "forgotten" Right.

The opening conference panel will be an overview of the history, evolution and power of the Right to Petition. The subsequent panels will cover the subject matters of our organization's four federal Petitions for Redress including the Iraq Resolution, the Federal Reserve, the USA Patriot Act and the individual income tax. The final panel will investigate the role of the media in relationship to the Petitioning process and will address a spectrum of constitutional abuses that could exercise the Right to Petition to secure remedies.

The preliminary agenda ... includes many subject matter experts and nationally renowned public figures that have all been invited to lead the conference.

Hutton Gibson, the conservative father of world-renowned actor, director and producer Mel Gibson, will address the convention. Discussions have been initiated with Mel Gibson to speak at the convention along with his father.

I am also enclosing a WTP brochure. It provides an overview of our Foundation's philosophy, mission, on-going initiatives and our uniqueness among liberty-minded organizations, which is due to our commitment to both civic education and civic activism and the emphasis we are placing on our Right to Petition the government for a Redress of our Grievances.

Please let me know as soon as possible if you will be able to attend and participate in the Conference as one of our featured speakers and, if so, what assistance we could render by way of an honorarium and expenses.

I may be contacted at the address above, at 518-656-3578 or at Bob@....

Sincerely,

[signed Bob]

Robert L. Schulz,

Chairman

The preliminary agenda may be viewed at

Ron considers this invitation an honor and privilege and has accepted.

He is currently scheduled as one of the speakers on the Sixth Panel, the final panel of the conference, which will address solutions to current problems, on Saturday, January 24, 2:00 p.m. Ron encourages as many of you as possible to attend, and wear your J.A.I.L. T-shirts in a show of unity. The J.A.I.L. organization is grateful to Bob Schulz and the WTP organization for extending this meaningful opportunity to us.

Thank you Bob!

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><

#759

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 11:24 pm
Subject: Bad Cops Bounce From City To City

jail4judges@...

J.A.I.L. News Journal
_____________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California December 3, 2003

Bad cops bounce from city to city

BY TRISHA L. HOWARD AND HEATHER RATCLIFFE Post-Dispatch http://tinyurl.com/xdb8
11/30/2003

Family members phoned for help after a bloody Elliot Smith arrived home one night 14 months ago and said a cop had shot him.

It was the first that St. Louis police had heard about the incident. Their officer, Stanley Davis, hadn't called it in, although he later said he had exchanged shots with a fleeing man. ....

Soon, Davis was carrying a new police badge - for Moline Acres. That lasted, the city's police chief said, until Davis got caught with stolen property.

After he was forced to resign, Davis landed on the force in Beverly Hills, a tiny north St. Louis County municipality. He later resigned but still holds a police license entitling him to work for any department in Missouri.

Davis' job-shifting is common enough among the 123 municipal police agencies across metro St. Louis that insiders have a name for it: "the muni shuffle."

It is a two-step dance. First, a department lets a problem officer go without completing a formal investigation that might cost him his police certificate. Then another department, eager to find an already-trained recruit at a bargain wage, hires him without asking too many questions. ....

The muni shuffle is a symptom of a system that doesn't always hold police officers to high standards. But not every officer in trouble has to do the shuffle. Some departments just give them chance after chance. ....

The Jeff Crisel case

By the time Brooklyn Officer Jeff Crisel accidentally ran over and killed a traffic violator he was chasing this year, he had worked at nine departments in a 15-year career marked by numerous allegations that he beat suspects with a flashlight.

The alleged beatings prompted at least three lawsuits, including one filed by a Macoupin County sheriff's deputy who said he was injured by Crisel when he tried to intervene on a suspect's behalf.

Village officials found that Crisel had left some previous employers off his application. On that basis, Brooklyn fired him. ....

The Stanley Davis case

Crisel's police career ended, at least for now, with an episode of violence. In Davis' case, violence is how it began.

Just three months out of the academy, Davis had a reputation as a tough guy, said Anthony Gray, Smith's lawyer. That was the reason, Gray said, that several men on a street corner in September last year scattered at the approach of Davis' St. Louis police car.

Smith was running through a gangway when he was shot four times in the back and legs by Davis, according to court documents. No other officers saw it happen. Davis did not tell his dispatcher. "That's more telling to me than anything. He never called for backup," Gray said. "Elliot was unarmed and running for his life." Davis later claimed that Smith had fired first. Prosecutors accused Smith of assaulting a police officer but then dropped the charges, citing unspecified problems with the case.

The St. Louis police fired Davis, but because he was still on probation, the department was not required to report the incident to the state authorities who license officers.

In Moline Acres, which pays officers about two-thirds as much as the city, Davis was caught with a stolen radio taken from a towed vehicle and fired, said Moline Acres Police Chief G. Thomas Walker - and again, with no report to the state.

Walker told state officials that Davis had resigned, but the chief didn't tell them why. Later, Walker said he didn't mention the incident because Davis left before the internal investigation was completed. ....

Officials are broadly aware of the muni shuffle.

"The less professional departments with problems tend to have a revolving door," Normandy Police Chief John Connolly said.

But the practice is impossible to quantify. Smaller departments hardly brag about taking on other agencies' discards. Misconduct is seldom reported to the state. Department personnel records are not public.

Post-Dispatch reporters documented at least a dozen examples of officers who repeatedly shifted among departments and at some point ended up in difficult circumstances that drew public attention. Most were accused of behavior the public would not expect from a profession generally held to higher standards.

Among them are:

Craig T. Inman, whose records show was fired from the Waterloo Police Department in 1999 for omitting more than a dozen traffic violations from his employment application. The omission came to light after Inman initiated two high-speed pursuits in two years that resulted in the deaths of four people. Inman is now an officer in Jennings.

James Fitzgibbon, who kept his job as a Pine Lawn detective after he was convicted in October of making harassing phone calls to a driver after a road rage incident in March. Since Fitzgibbon began his police career in 1986, he also has patrolled streets in Glendale, Country Club Hills, Jefferson County and Wellston. Fitzgibbon declined comment.

Marvin Shannon, who was charged with misdemeanor assault after police said he cut a student with a knife at Riverview Middle School, where he worked as a security guard. Shannon has worked at eight departments on both sides of the river despite a string of criminal charges and a felony conviction....

Officer J.D. Patton, was fired from two police agencies in Washington County, Ill., both times after fellow officers arrested him for various offenses, including DUI and fighting at a local bar. According to court records, Patton has misdemeanor convictions for the DUI and for providing alcohol to minors. He remains certified in Illinois and was recently given a temporary full-time police position in Washington Park.

Roy White, according to police records, shot and killed an unarmed man during a traffic stop in 1989 while he was working for the St. Louis police. The city fired him for violating policies, saying that he should have taken cover or called for backup. After his termination, he continued to work in law enforcement. He is now a part-time sergeant in Hillsdale. ....

Officer William E. Garrett, who started working in Venice in 1998, was convicted in 1987 of first-degree assault for shooting at a car during a road rage incident. Garrett's felony was removed from his record after he completed five years of probation. He is currently facing a misdemeanor battery charge filed three years ago in Madison County Circuit Court after he allegedly beat his girlfriend. ....

Supply and demand

Police chiefs say they fear the legal repercussions of providing negative job references. And they say it wastes time and money to complete an internal investigation against someone who has gone. Those factors create a supply of certified officers with questionable backgrounds.

On the demand side, small departments with small budgets and low pay are eager to get applications from people already certified. That saves them from paying tuition and wages for up to 15 weeks of training time. Chiefs doing the hiring may not know what they're getting; they may not even want to know.

Only after Crisel and Inman got into trouble did their bosses find significant omissions from their applications.

"The last thing cops want, unfortunately, is to be held accountable," said Clarence Harmon, who served 27 years with the St. Louis police before retiring as chief and later becoming mayor.

"A lot of these smaller departments kind of don't want to know because they have limited capacity and lower salaries," he said. "It's beneficial for them not to have to fund that training. That's the major driving force behind why agencies would hire somebody with a problematic background."

McCulloch, the St. Louis County prosecuting attorney, said he is frustrated that police chiefs tacitly endorse the muni shuffle by the way they fire and hire.

"It's way too many times that someone moves from department to department when a problem arises and that problem is never addressed," he complained. ....

Some don't shuffle

While some departments cast out misfits to be snared by another community, others are known to keep officers working despite repeated accusations of misconduct.

"Then these officers continue to engage in the behavior, and oftentimes the deviance escalates," said Victor Kappeler, a professor at Northern Kentucky University who studies police misconduct. "It doesn't serve an agency's interest to uncover an act of deviance because it tarnishes the organization."

Since Brian Britton joined the Calverton Park police in April 1996, he has been sued four times in federal court, accused of brutality and misconduct. ....

East St. Louis Officer Brett Rodgers got suspended eight times during his five years on the force.

The city paid $550,000 to a man who lost an eye after Rodgers and another officer beat him during a traffic stop in 1996. But Rodgers stayed on the force until 1999, when he was arrested for shooting a security guard in the leg at an East St. Louis nightclub. ....

Reporter Trisha L. Howard

E-mail: thoward@...

Phone: 618-659-3640

Reporter Heather Ratcliffe

E-mail: hratcliffe@...

Phone: 314-863-2821

ARE COPS CONSTITUTIONAL?
Roger Roots*

ABSTRACT

Police work is often lionized by jurists and scholars who claim to employ "textualist" and "originalist" methods of constitutional interpretation. Yet professional police were unknown to the United States in 1789, and first appeared in America almost a half-century after the Constitution's ratification.

The Framers contemplated law enforcement as the duty of mostly private citizens, along with a few constables and sheriffs who could be called upon when necessary.

This article marshals extensive historical and legal evidence to show that modern policing is in many ways inconsistent with the original intent of America's founding documents. The author argues that the growth of modern policing has substantially empowered the state in a way the Framers would regard as abhorrent to their foremost principles.

PART I

INTRODUCTION

Uniformed police officers are the most visible element of America's criminal justice system. Their numbers have grown exponentially over the past century and now stand at hundreds of thousands nationwide.1

Police expenses account for the largest segment of most municipal budgets and generally dwarf expenses for fire, trash, and sewer services.2

Neither casual observers nor learned authorities regard the sight of hundreds of armed, uniformed state agents on America's roads and street corners as anything peculiar � let alone invalid or unconstitutional. Yet the dissident English colonists who framed the United States Constitution would have seen this modern 'police state' as alien to their foremost principles. Under the criminal justice model known to the Framers, professional police officers were unknown.3

The general public had broad law enforcement powers and only the executive functions of the law (e.g., the execution of writs, warrants and orders) were performed by constables or sheriffs (who might call upon members of the community for assistance).4

Initiation and investigation of criminal cases was the nearly exclusive province of private persons. At the time of the Constitution's ratification, the office of sheriff was an appointed position, and constables were either elected or drafted from the community to serve without pay.5

Most of their duties involved civil executions rather than criminal law enforcement. The courts of that period were venues for private litigation � whether civil or criminal � and the state was rarely a party. Professional police as we know them today originated in American cities during the second quarter of the nineteenth century, when municipal governments drafted citizens to maintain order.6

The role of these "nightly watch" officers gradually grew to encompass the catching of criminals, which had formerly been the responsibility of individual citizens.7

While this historical disconnect is widely known by criminal justice historians, rarely has it been juxtaposed against the Constitution and the Constitution's imposed scheme of criminal justice.8

"Originalist" scholars of the Constitution have tended to be supportive, rather than critical of modern policing.9

This article will show, however, that modern policing violates the Framers' most firmly held conceptions of criminal justice. The modern police-driven model of law enforcement helps sustain a playing field that is fundamentally uneven for different players upon it. Modern police act as an army of assistants for state prosecutors and gather evidence solely with an eye toward the state's interests. Police seal off crime scenes from the purview of defense investigators, act as witnesses of convenience for the state in courts of law, and instigate a substantial amount of criminal activity under the guise of crime fighting. Additionally, police enforce social class norms and act as tools of empowerment for favored interest groups to the disadvantage of others.10

Police are also a political force that constantly lobbies for increased state power and decreased constitutional liberty for American citizens.

More at the site: http://www.constitution.org/lrev/roots/cops.htm

#760

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Tue Dec 9, 2003 5:49 am
Subject: **The Case Made For J.A.I.L. **

jail4judges@...

http://www.Constitution.org/abus/Wolfgram/ptnright.doc

J.A.I.L. News Journal
___________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California December 8, 2003

The Case Made For J.A.I.L.

Based on "How The Judiciary Stole The Right To Petition"

Written by John E. Wolfgram, B.A., J.D., Constitution Researcher

-------------------------------------------------------------

A Review by Barbie, Founder's Assistant,

National J.A.I.L., victoryusa@...

It wasn't until I read the formal Invitation from Bob Schulz of We The People Foundation (WTP) to J.A.I.L.'s Founder, Ron Branson, to participate in the "Give Me Liberty 2004" conference, and saw the central theme being "The Right to Petition for Redress: Re-discovering The 'capstone' Right," that I became aware of how much closer to J.A.I.L. patriots are becoming, whether they realize it or not.

That sparked me to remember the treatise written by John Wolfgram, that I started to read and laid aside because of other pressing obligations, which is based on the Right to Petition-- but more provocatively, ties it in with the judiciary! And even more amazingly, I find that it lays the track leading to (I don't want to say "jail") -- but to J.A.I.L. Unlike the Monopoly card that says "go directly to jail," the subject treatise goes directly to J.A.I.L., the Judicial Accountability Initiative Law. It all but mentions the name, but builds the case for J.A.I.L. beautifully! I invite all of you to download it from the URL shown above and read it for yourselves, after you've become familiar with the mission of J.A.I.L. at www.jail4judges.org.

Being heavily involved with the internet, I have watched the WTP organization move across the bridge from the Income Tax cause (one of the many branches on the tree of evil), to the Right to Petition for Redress (a larger branch --one of the boughs-- on that same tree), leading toward the trunk and corrupted root system that feeds it all. The march toward Freedom will eventually come to the courts where the show-down between the People and government will be concluded within the system, i.e., within the tree of evil which the system has become.

When the march reaches that point, the People will begin to realize that the corruption becomes more concentrated and putrid as they reach the trunk and eventually the roots where the judicial system thrives under ground and out of sight, feeding the corruption to the rest of the tree, i.e., the powers that be. The People will soon come to realize, in sufficient numbers, that the tree itself isn't the problem, but it's the ROOTS that thrive under ground, out of sight, in secret, not easily accessed, that are ultimately responsible for the condition of the entire tree. The People will learn that they will have to focus their efforts in ridding the tree of evil of the source of its corruption-- i.e., the root system; and the People will learn by experience, the hard way, that in our system of "government," the judiciary comprises that root system. And finally, the People will learn that it is they who must act to clean up that root system of tyranny. The system is NOT self-cleaning.

As Thomas Jefferson said: "Who will govern the governors? There is only one force in the nation that can be depended upon to keep the government pure and the governors honest, and that is the people themselves. They alone, if well informed, are capable of preventing the corruption of power, and of restoring the nation to its rightful course if it should go astray. They alone are the safest depository of the ultimate powers of government."

The one condition Jefferson states for the People to be capable of acting effectively to restore our Constitutional Republic is "if [they are] well informed." Apparently the People --or at least enough of them-- are not yet well informed of what they must do to save this Republic. I am

now hearing, from several well-meaning patriot sources "We must educate the public." In fact that statement was recently said to me by an outstanding patriot while rejecting the fact that "J.A.I.L. is the only answer."

It must be remembered that the public at large doesn't want to be educated. As the saying goes, "Ignorance is bliss." Mr. Wolfgram states "It is not that government has accomplished the 'impossible' of practically denying the right [of petition], but rather that the 'spirit of liberty' has almost 'wholly disappeared and the people have become servile and debased.' But 'fitness' to exercise the rights of freemen is never determined by the many who have become servile, but by the few who refuse, at any cost, to surrender their rights to government." [p.258] Ironically, some in the latter category are still not convinced that J.A.I.L. is the answer. However, as Ron and I are convinced, it's not IF they become convinced about J.A.I.L., but WHEN.

Apparently more time is needed for the People to continue fighting at the "bough level" of the tree-- at least they have progressed that far-- doing whatever they can to put more pressure on government (executive and legislative departments) to do the right thing, before they will become educated that such efforts will have no effect until they do something about the roots-- yes, the judicial system! The People have to be educated that writing to your congressman, voting for the right officials, withholding payment of taxes, and other pressures at the "bough level" aren't going to matter as long as the roots (the judiciary) remain untouched and allowed to continue feeding the corruption. The obvious conflict of interest within the system will continue as long as the People refrain from removing it. As long as that "feeding tube" remains intact, there will continue to be casualties for demanding, of the corrupt system, government obedience to the Constitution.

We believe that enough of the People already know that the judiciary is the problem. Even knowing that isn't enough however-- they must learn what they can DO about the problem. The People must be educated on the solution-- not on ways to continue fighting and complaining about the problem; and a non-violent solution is already here, waiting to be implemented by the People. It's all set forth in writing, and there is nothing else that meets its effectiveness for the People to actively become that "one force in the nation that can be depended upon to keep the government pure and the governors honest." They must be educated on the solution-- not on fighting the problem. People must become educated that J.A.I.L. is the only answer! Yes, there will always be those who refuse to accept that fact (the naysayers)-- it can't be avoided-- we know that. But that cannot and will not get in the way of progress! It's just a matter of time. We can already see progress being made-- at least to the "bough level."

Again I invite everyone to read the subject item in its entirety written by John Wolfgram. Much insight is given to why the judiciary is responsible for stealing our rights, and especially our Right to Petition for Redress. I review only some of the highlights here, to show by evidence that J.A.I.L. is the answer.

John starts out by saying "Immunity abridges the right to redress grievances with government." [p.258] He goes on to discuss sovereign immunity generally and its origins. Nothing in the Constitution grants sovereignty to government. The Constitution is to protect the unalienable rights of the sovereign people. However, government has organized itself, through enforcement by the judiciary, to protect itself from accountability to the people by granting itself immunity. The most egregious form of immunity is judicial immunity which is the foremost obstruction of judicial remedy and ability of the people to effectively communicate with government. Mr. Branson has been educated through the "School of Hard Knocks" for eighteen years, having become a victim of the abuse of judicial immunity, finally resulting in his creating the solution to it.

As John says, judicial immunity has created a kingship of the judiciary and designed "judicial supremacy" over the Constitution: "[W]e are harnessed with a judiciary that insists on immunity from the people based in the bygone philosophy of 'The Divine Right of Kings.' Per Justice Jay, the 'reason' America adopted that medieval judicial philosophy is his lack of the courage of constitutional conviction. A few years later, Justice Marshall designed judicial supremacy over the Constitution so that it now means whatever The Court says that it means. Between them, they found a novel way to avoid the 'messy business' of amending the Constitution. We can call that 'Constitutional Amendment by Judicial Fiat.' It is not legal, and in effect, it undermines the entire reason for having a constitution at all. That is just cause for grievance with our 'justice system.' The problem: how to capture the government's attention?" [p.269]

I'll bet J.A.I.L. might capture the government's attention!

J.A.I.L.'s Preamble states: (originally written for California) We, the People of California, find that the doctrine of judicial immunity has been greatly abused; and when judges abuse their power, the people are obliged - it is their duty - to correct that injury, for the benefit of themselves and their posterity. In order to ensure judicial accountability and domestic tranquility, we hereby amend Article I of our Constitution to add these provisions, which shall be known as "The Judicial Accountability Amendment."

Note that the objective of J.A.I.L. is judicial accountability and domestic tranquility, i.e., a peaceful revolution without violence. Our Republic deserves a chance at a non-violent method of restoration by the People before resorting to bloodshed. That is a very important entreaty of J.A.I.L. Give J.A.I.L. a chance first-- what is there to lose by doing so? At least it can be said in history that the People attempted to restore constitutional rule by safe and sane methods prior to seeing blood run in the streets. In such case the People can't be blamed for what happens if the peaceful method fails.

It is through judicial accountability that we will attain domestic tranquility. "...that government is accountable under the law for the wrongs that it does to the people... is a fundamental concept of civilization, as we know it. ...'rights' don't mean a thing unless enforceable; people enforce rights, either with bombs and guns, or in a civilized world, through effective compulsory process of law; to wit, the judicial remedy." [p.268] (emphasis added)

I emphasize the phrase "through effective compulsory process of law" which in today's system is NOT the judicial remedy to which the People are entitled. The judicial remedy has eroded into judicial tyranny through its corruption by judicial abuse of power. Therefore, in enforcing their rights by the terms of the Constitution, the people must, in a civilized world, devise an "effective compulsory process of law" as a people's autonomous function (independent of government) in order to transform judicial tyranny into "the judicial remedy" according to law. That "effective compulsory process of law" is J.A.I.L. which will provide the means of obtaining the judicial remedy (i.e., providing Redress of Grievances) by removing the obstruction of abusive judicial immunity (unaccountability) and holding judges accountable to the people. For the sake of the healthy future of this Republic, the people must maintain the fundamental concept of civilization as we know it, if at all possible.

A lot more is covered by Mr. Wolfgram in the above treatise which is also found at 31 UWLA Law Review 258. I hope enough was said here to explain the connection between the Right to Petition for Redress and J.A.I.L. In closing, I will quote two more provocative statements:

"The judiciary is a part of government and government does not want to see an effective Petition Clause because that nullifies arbitrary power at all levels. Effective petition rights create problems for all of government by requiring direct accountability of government officials to the people they injure. ... [T]he judicial theft of the First Amendment Petition of Right is a fact the judiciary has effectively concealed for over 200 years. Why should anyone believe that the judges would change that concealment and denial policy now?" [p.289]

"The point is not merely that the Judiciary usurped powers not delegated to it; but it has become so involved in and biased toward controlling the people for government, that it cannot fairly administer justice. The judiciary is no longer fit to perform its primary judicial function." [p.303]

************************

John E. Wolfgram, B.A. Degree (University of Wisconsin), J.D. Degree (Southwestern University 1977). Wolfgram founded the Constitutional Defender Association in 1989 to advance Petition Clause Principles. Its name derives from the observation that the practical value of a Constitution depends on the effective enforcement of constitutional rights and limits against government, by the people. The Petition Clause is the People's Right to redress government violations of the Constitution. It is The Constitution's Defense system against government usurpation and oppression.

On behalf of National J.A.I.L., I thank John Wolfgram for his dedicated effort in this valuable research and publication. "How The Judiciary Stole The Right to Petition" should go a long way in educating the public. A strong requirement is their willingness to be educated! You may thank him by email at jewolf@... -Barbie-

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><

#761

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Wed Dec 10, 2003 5:13 am
Subject: * * * Understanding Administrative Law * * *

jail4judges@...

J.A.I.L. News Journal
_____________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California December 9, 2003

Understanding

Administrative Law

(By Ron Branson, Author/Founder J.A.I.L.)

What you are about to read is very provocative and likely to shock, but educate, many of you. Some of you will likely be inspired to do likewise, but just as you see those disclaimers which say, "Experts - do not try this at home," so I say, "Do not try mimicking this at home. Remember, when reality and common sense run up against politics and money, the former two will not register in the courts."

We have all heard the term "Administrative Law." Administrative Law is everywhere in society, and affects everyone of us. But despite our familiarity, how many people really know what "Administrative Law" is? Most people see the word "Law" and automatically think it is some kind of a special law passed by either Congress, our state legislators, or our city councils, etc. No matter where we are in our experience and knowledge of Administrative Law, we all tend to feel deep down inside, "I just do not like it." It is that same sort of feeling when we drive down the highway and pass a police car with its lights flashing, having pulled over a car. You don't naturally think, "Boy, I'm pleased to see that police officer out here on the highway performing us a public service." Rather, you are more likely to think, "Boy, I'm glad it's him he pulled over, and not me." Just as hearing from the Internal Revenue Service, "public service" is probably the last thing that enters your mind.

Administrative Law demands things of us that intrude into our personal lives, our homes, our businesses. It makes us comply with certain codes, inspects us, demands arbitrary taxes and payment in advance of establishing liability, calls us into account before boards composed of political appointees having conflicts of interests, all without the benefit of a trial by jury of your peers.

Administrative Law governs us, to name only a few, in our relation to our children through CPS, our right to contract through the State Contractor's License Board, our businesses through Business Licenses and Worker's Compensation Boards which provide a feeding frenzy for lawyers, and even our pleasurable moments through Fishing and Gaming Licenses, our travel through DMV, etc., etc, and so on without end. In fact, all of our lives in every area is governed by administrative agencies and their "laws," and there is near nothing that is not regulated and licensed by some agency. It would almost seem that life's existence itself is but a special privilege of government that is revocable upon whim. Whatever happened to "... governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...?

As some of may you already know, none of the protections set forth in the U.S. Constitution has any application whatsoever upon the enforcement and carrying out of "Administrative Law." So we shout with outrage at the government, "You're violating my Constitutional rights," and you ask, "What gives? Is Administrative Law superior to, and above, the Constitution of the United States, which is the supreme Law of this Land?"

I am now going to pull the veil off the mystery of "Administrative Law," and let you in on a secret that no government wants you to know. Some of you are going to laugh at the simplicity of the matter, once I tell you. "Administrative Law" is not some esoteric law passed by some legislative body. "Administrative Law" simply means "Contract Agreement." But if government called it what it really was, everyone would know what is going on. But by the government calling it "Administrative Law," few understand it, and think, "Oh my goodness, I don't want to go to jail because I violated Administrative Law." What you must implicitly remember is that Administrative Law and Police Powers are diametrically opposed to each other. They cannot co-exist in the same context. Like oil and water, they can never mix. But governments do not want you to know that. If there were any form of police power exerted to enforce "Administrative Law," it would clearly fly in the face of the Constitution. So all governments exercise fraud when they take "Administrative Law" beyond "the consent of the governed," Declaration of Independence.

Every time you hear the term "Administrative Law," you must correctly think "Contract Agreement." If everyone thought that way, people would automatically ask themselves the logical question, "Where's the contract?" But government does not want you to think in terms of "Contracts," nor the fact that there can ever be police powers involved in the enforcement of a contract. If you fail to show up for work, can your boss call up the police and send them out to arrest you? No! This is true even if your boss happens to be the city, or the chief of police. Police powers are limited only to criminal acts, never contract disputes. These are totally separate and exclusive jurisdictions.

The U.S. Constitution specifically forbids all fifty states of this country from passing any law that interferes with any individual's right of contract, or, if the persons so chooses, the right not to contract. "No state shall...make any...law impairing the obligation of contracts." Article I, Sec. 10, Clause 1. The right to contract necessarily establishes the right not to contract. Just like the First Amendment to Congress, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" so in Article I, Sec. 10, no state shall make any law that impairs the free exercise of the right to contract or not to contract. Now how does this Constitutional prohibition to states apply to such state administrative agencies as the "State Contractor's License Board?" Ah, yes, and note, we are not here even challenging this as an Administrative Law, but rather the very authority of the State itself to even "make" such an administrative agency that presumes to govern the right to contract. In other words, the Legislature was acting unconstitutionally when they even considered "making" such a law, whether the law passed by a majority vote or not. In other words, it was null and void the very moment it was "passed." One could just imagine the untold hundreds of billions of dollars that would invigorate the entire economy of this country if states could not interfere with, or tax our constitutional right to contract, or not to contract, with whosoever we pleased.

Contracts are very much a necessary part of all of our lives, and we all understand the meaning of agreements and keeping our word. Contracts always must contain a consideration, and are made voluntarily for the mutual benefit of each of the parties entering them.

I am going to explain the legitimate uses of contracts, and then proceed to what they have transmuted into by the State. In a legitimate contract, for instance, and I speak to those married, remember the days when you went out on dates with that special person that made your heart throb? You fell in love and the two of you decided, for the mutual benefit of both of you, to get married. You voluntarily appeared before a minister who asked you the question, "Do you, Sharon, take Steven to be your lawfully wedded husband?" In which you replied, "I do!" You were under no obligation to agree. Remember, wherever one may say "Yes" or "I do" they equally have the right to say, "No," or "I don't," to wit, "Do you, Steven, take Sharon to be your lawfully wedded wife?" which could equally be responded to by, "No, I do not!" Of course, what a way to shock everyone and ruin a marriage ceremony. Without both parties agreeing equally to the full terms and conditions, there can be no "Administrative Law," oops, I mean, "Contract Agreement."

(For the benefit of those of you reading this who are ministers, I would like to take a sidebar. What are those commonly heard words that come from your lips, "...lawfully wedded wife?" I ask you, is there an "unlawfully wedded wife," or an "unlawfully wedded husband?" How did those words get in the marriage vow? Why not just ask, "Do you, Steven, take Sharon to be your wife?" Ah, it is the State trying to stick their foot in the door and become a third party to the marriage "Contract Agreement." I ask you, is it a crime to get married? Must couples have government's permission to get married? The government thinks so. But does the government have constitutional authority to do so? Absolutely not.

Consider the marriage license. A license is a special grant of permission from the government to do that which is otherwise illegal. People are now being convicted of "practicing law without a license," so I ask you, are couples who refuse marriage licenses guilty of practicing marriage without a license? We are instructed in the Bible, "Whoso findeth a wife findeth a good thing, and obtaineth favour of the LORD." Prov. 18:22. Yes, and remember that famous quote, "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's, Matt. 22:21, and "What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." Matt. 19:6. Would it not be just as appropriate if God were to say, "What therefore God has 'licensed,' let not man license?" Of course! Are you not therefore rendering to Caesar that which is God's? And are you not doing it "By the power vested in you by the State of [fill in state], I now pronounce you man and wife." And what about this so-called doctrine beaten into our heads by the courts of "Separation of Church and State?" End of sidebar.)

Let's next turn to the "Contract Agreement" of Civil Service Employment. You open the newspaper and see an ad placed by the City of TenBuckTwo, saying "Now hiring." You go and apply for the job and you are hired. Whether it be secretary, street cleaner, or police officer, you enter a Civil Service Contract, and receive a mutual benefit, i.e, a paycheck. If you were to receive no consideration from the city, you would be merely a slave. Neither the city nor you were under duress, you both receive a consideration, and established a legitimate "Contract Agreement." The city wishes to call it "Administrative Law." After being hired, if there arises a dispute, you cannot shout, "My Constitutional Rights were violated," for you are now under Civil Service protection, and are not entitled to a jury trial nor any of the protections of the Constitution, for now it is Administrative Law that controls, and the Constitution has no application whatsoever.

Now let's take this a step further, and talk about a ticket. I once was mailed a ticket through the mail offering me an "Administrative Review." I wrote back to this administrative agency by certified mail with return receipt, and with a sworn declaration attached stating that I had never entered into a "Contract Agreement" with them, and that such contract did not exist. I further demanded that they respond with a counter-declaration stating that I had indeed entered into a "Contract Agreement" with them, and thus bring the question into issue. (An uncontested declaration stands as the truth. No counter-declaration, no dispute.) I also demanded that they attach of copy of the contract we had between us as evidence to support their contention.

This administrative agency just did not know what to do, so they just declared my "request for an Administrative Review" untimely, despite the certified mail proving otherwise. They then stated that I now owed them more than twice the amount they originally demanded of me. However, as you note, I did not ask for an "Administrative Review." Rather my only issue was the appropriateness and legitimacy of the agency "offering" me the administrative review. If you received a letter from Moscow, Russia accusing you of failing to possess a license from the Moscow Aviation Flight Board, and offering you an administrative review, would you ask for an administrative review?

Further, in my communication to this administrative body, which further baffled them, I asked, "When you say you are offering me an "Administrative Review," it implies I am now on appeal. Was there a trial in which I have already been found guilty, and that I now should appeal that decision? I never received a notice of such trial. When was the trial? Who sat in judgment? What was the basis of his or her findings? What is the particular clause in the "Contract Agreement" I have been found guilty of violating?

You see, my questions were entirely logical and practical, but they just did not know how to deal with me. So they just forged ahead with enforcement as if I said nothing. This resulted in my lawsuit against them which went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court twice, once through the state courts, and then all the way through the federal, the issue in federal court being deprivation of due process of law. There was not one court, neither state, nor federal, that would address a single issue I presented in my lawsuit. This suit resulted in five long years of litigation, and the agency admittedly spent over $100,000.00 defending itself, and demanded of me that I should pay them for their time from what started out to be $55.

This case resulted in my filing a criminal complaint against the defendants with the U.S. Attorney, and petitioning Congress to open impeachment proceedings against five federal judges for conspiracy to commit extortion, accompanied with a copy of the proposed Federal J.A.I.L. Bill, with my instant case as an example of why Congress should pass J.A.I.L. into law. Everything grew very quiet. No one would say anything.

All this over the implied assumption that I had entered into a "Contract Agreement" that did not exist, and never did exist.

Here in Los Angeles, the city dispenses bureaucrats throughout the city to your search your home. However, the city likes to refer to it as "inspection." Although the U.S. Constitution provides, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizure shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized" [Fourth Amendment], these bureaucrats come to you "for your good," as a "public service." They charge you money for their services, and exercise police power, having neither oath or affirmation, warrant, or probable cause, mandating you "volunteer" to accept their searches. If you refuse to volunteer, they turn you over to the city prosecutor who will prosecute you for failure to comply with the program. If you think these bureaucrats are bribe-free, you have a shock coming. Many hint at and suggest that they can arrange special treatment for you, or that they can make things very bad for you.

We have now come to the point in this country where the public's common acceptance that we are administrative subjects, that a mere suggestion by a government bureaucrat has now become law, and one is guilty by the simple allegation of whatever charge these bureaucrats wish to lay upon them without appeal to the Constitution.

Approximately seven years ago I was stopped by a police officer. He "offered" to engage me into a contract with him. The problem with his contract offer was that it was imposed upon me by the threat of my going immediately to jail, and that of having my car stolen. Under criminal constitutional standards he was required to take me before a magistrate at least within 48 hours of his conducting my arrest. He did not wish to do that however, so for his convenience, not mine, he asked me to enter into a contract with him. But what was my consideration in this contract? Was it that I didn't have to go to jail immediately? Nay, for that is like placing a gun to one's head and asking them to voluntarily write a check, which is called "Robbery" in the criminal codes.

This nice policeman told me that by signing his ticket, I was not waiving any of my rights. I read it, and all it said was that I promised to appear before the clerk of the court authorized to receive bail by a certain date. I went ahead and took the comfortable route, and signed his contract under duress, "agreeing" to appear before the court clerk as opposed to going to jail. I then went to the clerk of the court by the date specified and asked if she was the clerk of the court authorized to accept bail. She said "Yes." I then told her who I was, and that since she was the authorized person before whom I had promised to appear, I needed her signature showing I had fulfilled my promise. She refused. Gee, what's wrong with these people? They demand my signature to show up before them under threat of going to jail. I show up as they ask and request their signature to show that I have complied, and they refuse. They do not respect you for keeping your promise to them. It seems they are not satisfied, and they want something more from you than they made you promise. Hmmm, it seems to me that not all the terms of the contract were revealed when the officer said all I had to do was appear in front of the clerk. I must have been defrauded.

What they really wanted, and now demanded, was that I appear before a commissioner, not a judge, when originally I was entitled under the Constitution to appear before a magistrate for a determination of probable cause of my arrest by the kind police officer. The officer must have lied to me when I was clearly told that I would not be waiving any of my rights. But a waiver of my rights under the Constitution requires my voluntary and knowledgeable consent with a consideration in the pie for me. But I never got the pie. This "Contract Agreement" does not seem to be like saying "I do" at the altar and getting a wife, or "I agree" at the Civil Service interview, and getting a paycheck.

This commissioner bullied me, trying to induce me by force to enter into his offered contract agreement, when in no way was he qualified to act or perform pursuant to the Fourth Amendment requirements of a magistrate.

When he failed to convince me that it was in my best interest that I should voluntarily agree to his contract, he proceeded to unilaterally enter me into his contract whether I agreed to it or not. And of course, it was done with "my best interest at heart." He's an educated man, and has graduated from law school. So why didn't he know that a contract requires my voluntary consent? Having waived my rights for me (which is an impossibility), he now tells me that I am going to appear for trial on the date he chose for me, and that I am going to sign a promise to appear. I told him, "NO! I am not going to sign such a contract agreement!" He became very wroth, and I was immediately arrested, chained to thieves, con artists, and extortionists and thrown into jail for not agreeing to sign.

At least one of the sheriff's deputies handling me expressed disbelief at what she was hearing that I was arrested for not agreeing to sign on to the commissioner's offer. Here they were digging through my pockets and relieving me of all my possessions, and my crime is failing to accept an offer. This could only be a civil charge at best, but refusing to contract is not a violation of a contract. I had not even agreed to the deprivation of a magistrate to appear before this commissioner.

No sooner had they illegally processed me into the Los Angeles County jail system, that they wanted to get rid of me. Under California statute, no person can be jailed on an alleged infraction, but here I was in jail. The fact is, neither the courts nor the administrative boards know how to deal with the rare individual who sensibly raises questions about the existence of a contract, so they just bully forward with police power enforcement, and address nothing.

The deputies told me they were putting me out of jail, but that I must come back to court on the date specified by the commissioner. I told them "No! I did not agree to appear." They told me that if I did not appear, I would be arrested. I said that I was already under arrest, so just keep me in jail until you are finished with me. They said, we can't do that, we don't have the money to keep you here. I said, "I'm not here to save you money. If you want me, just keep me here. If you don't want me, put me out." So they threw me out of jail to get rid of me, and I never showed up later. In the meantime, I commenced suit against the commissioner for kidnapping, holding me hostage and demanding ransom for my release. (His ransom was my signature, for he said when I gave him my signature, I would be free to go. Of course, that was why I was in jail because I did not agree to that.)

In my civil suit against the commissioner, I had him totally defenseless, and the trial judge hearing the case knew it. There was absolutely no way the commissioner could lawfully wiggle off, but since when do judges do things lawfully? The trial judge knew the commissioner was naked, and had no jurisdiction whatsoever for what he did to me. He slammed his hands down on the bench and said, "Mr. Branson, in all my twenty years' career on the bench, I have never met a person like you." He then quoted the words found in my complaint, "Just keep me in jail until you are finished with me."

This judge could see the potential chaotic conditions if every person which was stopped by the cops stated "Just keep me in jail until you are finished with me." I was supposed to fear losing my job, my reputation and companionship and capitulate. He knew that if everybody did what I was doing, the entire system would fall apart. I was suddenly costing government mocho money to the tune of thousands upon thousands of dollars when the whole idea was to make some money from me. This lawsuit continued for years all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court, yet not one judge would address the issues of my contract case.

I now refer to a humorous situation that sounds like make-believe. An acquaintance of mine was called into court by one of the ABC "public service" administrative agencies to be cross-examined to discover information from him to be used against him. He was asked to take the witness stand. They asked him to raise his right hand after which the clerk of the court said, "Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?" He responded, "No, I do not!" Everyone in the court gasped. (Remember, the right to say "Yes" also includes the right to say "No!") The judge instructed the clerk to re-read the swearing-in again, supposing that he just did not understand the question. He responded the second time, "I heard you the first time, and my answer is, No, I do not!" You can imagine the uncomfortable and embarrassing situation into which this placed the judge. He asked why he would not swear to tell the truth, and he said, "The Bible says, 'Let God be true, but every man a liar,' " (referring to Rom. 3:4), and "I am a man, and a liar."

The judge came unglued and threaten him with jail if he did not swear to tell the truth. He responded, "Judge, you asked me a straight-forward question requiring either a yes, or a no answer. I gave you a straight-forward answer to your question, and that was No, I do not. You can't say I did not answer your question, for I did answer it, but you just don't like my answer. If you didn't want to hear my answer, then don't ask me the question. And judge, on what basis do you threaten me with jail? Is it because I answered your question truthfully? Or is it because you wanted me to lie, and I didn't do it? Or is it because you believe I am lying to you when I tell you I am a man, and a liar?"

The judge threw him in jail for three days, after which he brought him forth to swear him in again. He said, "Judge, my answer to you is still the same as three days ago. I am still a man, and still a liar, and no amount of jail time can change that. The judge again threaten him with jail, to which he responded, "On what basis do you threaten me with jail? Is it because I answered your question truthfully, and you want me to lie? Or is it because you believe I am lying to you when I tell you I am a man, and a liar?"

The system just does not know how to handle people who question the actions of government when all the government is only trying to get your approval to what they do to you. If you don't agree to the Contract Agreement, then they do you the favor of "agreeing" for you even if it is against your will, without consideration. As I say, this is not quite like you saying "I do" at the alter, but the judge spake and it was so.

Other examples are, when you are called to jury duty, the judge makes you raise your right hand and agree to follow the law as interpreted to you by the judge. But wait, it is not the judge or the jurors who are entitled to a jury trial, but the defendant who is constitutionally entitled to a fully informed and unencumbered jury which must judge on both the law and the facts. Here we have a judge seeking to induce the defendant's jurors to conspire with him against the defendant. How can the judge, in conspiracy with the jurors, agree to waive the rights of the defendant? They can't. It is the defendant that is entitled to a fair and impartial trial, "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy ... an impartial jury." Jurors who have been induced to conspire with the judge cannot possible be "an impartial jury." Fifth Amendment, U.S. Constitution.

Then there are the various taxing agencies who want you to enter into a "Contract Agreement" with them. They kindly provide you with a pre-printed line on their forms to agree with their offer of a "Contract Agreement." But if you choose not to accept their offer, can one go to jail? Not constitutionally. However, they somehow want you to believe that if you do not accept their offer, then you are obligated to comply with their "Imposed Criminal Administrative Law," for after all, you don't want to go to jail because you violated the law.

Remember, anything that requires your signature, or a swearing thereto in order to give it application, is not law, but a contract. A contract must entail being fully cognizant of all its terms, agreeing to all those terms, having equal right to say yes or no, offering you a consideration to which you would rather have than retaining your constitutional rights and saying no, being totally done without duress in any way. Anything otherwise fails the test of a contract.

The Solution:

The solution is quite simple, J.A.I.L. I know there will be many naysayers who will seek to convince me that it is for the above reasons that J.A.I.L. will not work because everyone has waived their rights to the Constitution, and thus, we are all slaves of the government. To those, in an effort to cut these Naysayers off, I say, "Please re-read the last two sentences in the above paragraph defining contracts."

Here is how J.A.I.L. will solve the problem. Under J.A.I.L. cases will be brought before judges arguing fraud, deception, and undo influence, by government agents. The judge will be required to apply the proper laws governing these grievances, to which he will have no escape or evasion. If the judge does evade the issue, the party will call the judge on it, and give him his last chance to comply with the law as addressed to the issue presented. (This will satisfy the willful acts requirement of J.A.I.L.)

From there, it is purely a matter of exhausting appeals afforded within the state, keeping the fraud issue alive, and filing a complaint with the Special Grand Jury created by J.A.I.L. The judge will then be served by the Special Grand Jury and told to answer it. The complainant can then reply to the judge's opposition.

They judge may wish to argue that the complainant has no rights of protection by the Constitution because he waived them all. The complainant may reply that the so-called "waivers" to which the judge refers in his defense is but a part of the conspiracy alleged to which the judge was a necessary actor in the conspiracy. Of course, when these Special Grand Jurors hear the judge's argument, it will doubtless occur to them that they too have become the dupes of the same giant judicial fraud and conspiracy to which the complainant, and all other complainants are arguing about.

J.A.I.L. works like quicksand. It increases the judges liability the more he says in an attempt to justify himself. He has now implicated himself in a potential criminal indictment, and may face prison in addition to being civilly liable to the complainant, it which he cannot allege he is covered by judicial immunity. Further, the blabbing of one judge in his defense is more than likely going to indict the entire judicial system and all the judges in one giant sweep, for they are all tied together in the same conspiracy.

In nearly every instance in which I can think, under J.A.I.L. the judge's best defense is to say nothing, for anything he says can and will be used against him in a court of law, either civilly or criminally. Judges generally will be best suited to accept the lesser evil of not countering the complaint unless they know they have been totally honest and forthright, and can support their position by the Constitution and the law, which will be very hard to do in these days when most everything is based upon fraud and deception.

The eventual positive impact that J.A.I.L. will make upon this nation on behalf of restoring government back to the people is inestimable involving such a boon to the American economy that it is beyond comprehension. - Ron Branson (J.A.I.L. CIC)

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><

#762

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Thu Dec 11, 2003 5:16 am
Subject: Redirecting The Heat Towards The Courts

jail4judges@...

J.A.I.L. News Journal
_____________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California                                        December 10, 2003

Redirecting The Heat

Towards The Courts

Protesters urged to speak up
Use the vote to make self heard, speakers say
By Susanne Cervenka
scervenka@...
and Laura A. Bischoff
lbischoff@...
COLUMBUS | Former Republican presidential candidate Alan Keyes called on voters Friday to speak out and ask their representatives to remove "tyrannical federal judges" who he said are undermining the nation.
"Our politicians call themselves leaders but they are not gonna lead us any place that we don�t take them first," Keyes told a rally outside the Ohio Statehouse.
A crowd of nearly 100 stood in frigid rain for two hours to listen to Keyes and about a half-dozen conservative speakers denounce judicial decisions. Those targeted included Roe v. Wade and the recent Massachusetts Supreme Court decision on same-sex unions.
Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell, a Republican candidate for governor in 2006, urged the crowd to correct the problem by becoming active voters.
"Ladies and gentlemen we can�t sit on the sidelines," he said. "This cannot just be a rhetorical show."
The Restore the Law rally was sponsored by Citizens for Community Values, Minutemen United, Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, Reform America Coalition and other groups.
"If someone doesn�t do something, what will we be leaving to our children?" asked speaker Dave Daubenmire, director and founder of Minutemen United, a Christian-based reform organization.
State Rep. Diana Fessler, R-New Carlisle, who was at the rally, said, "The one thing that came to my mind was, �Let it begin with me.� �
At a press conference later in the day, Keyes praised Ohioans in Adams County who are continuing to press the case that they be allowed to display the Ten Commandments on public property.
In 1997, residents decided to display the Ten Commandments at the four new high school buildings in the rural county of 28,000 along the Ohio River.
One resident complained and the American Civil Liberties Union filed suit in February 1999, said Ken Johnson, a spokesman for Adams County for the Ten Commandments. After lengthy legal battles, the monuments were removed in June.
Supporters of the Ten Commandments have appealed the removal order. Oral arguments were held Friday before a three-judge panel in the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati.
Keyes, who was ambassador to the U.N. Economic and Social Council from 1983 to 1985, called those pressing the case "courageous."

Not too long ago all political attention was focused upon the Executive and the Legislative Bodies of government in seeking relief. However, it is becoming more and more obvious that the heat is shifting toward the judges and the judiciary of this country. We are sensing that all political movements, groups and organizations are slowly moving toward the consciousness that passage of J.A.I.L. is the only answer. We anticipate that we all shall soon see group after group coming into the fold of JAIL4Judges with a united voice to call our nation's judiciary into account, and putting government back into the hands of the People.

J.A.I.L.= Judicial Accountability Initiative Law - www.jail4judges.org
JAIL is a unique addition to our form of gov't. heretofore unrealized.
JAIL is powerful! JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope!
JAIL is taking America like a wildfire! AddRemove@...
JAIL is making inroads into Congress for federal accountability!
E-Groups sign on at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/join
Get involved at JAIL_SALE_USA-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Send donations to J.A.I.L., P.O. Box 207, N. Hollywood, CA 91603

"Those who say it cannot be done should not interfere with those of us who are doing it."                                       --S. Hickman

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root."                         -- Henry David Thoreau    <><

#763

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Fri Dec 12, 2003 7:23 pm
Subject: Where are all the gurus?

jail4judges@...

This is a question for the egroups out there.

----- Original Message -----

From: Ed Lewis

To: VictoryUSA@...

Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 9:22 PM

Subject: Re: Nick Jesson Needs Encouragement

Dear Ron and Barbie,

I, too, would like to know where all the support is along with Mr. Jesson. There are dozens, maybe hundreds, of tax gurus spread out across this land leading people to the fact that "federal income tax" does not apply to the domestic earnings of American Citizens within the states. In fact, unless completely stupid, they know the IRS or any other federal agency has no authority within the states but only have authority in federal jurisdiction areas, including States of the United States (the island States), the District of Columbia, and areas in which states have ceded jurisdiction, such as for arsenals, Dock-yards, and other federally controlled property and territories.

The gurus have in some cases collected hundreds of thousands of dollars from Americans and, yet, when push comes to shove, they bow out of the issues when confronted by the government. Not all suffer from this lack of spine but most do.

Furthermore, tax courts nor other territorial courts have any jurisdiction over the American people but only over those in territories. The many states are not territories and therefore Article IV courts or any State created courts are not lawful courts in relation to the people.

No American can be held to answer for any crime lacking an indictment issued by a Grand Jury on the complaint from another flesh and blood man or woman that they or their property has been damaged by another and that such damage to person or property is defined as a crime. Lacking a natural person - the prosecutor - making such a claim, there is no crime. In other words, lacking a victim, or a claim of damage by a human, or an indictment based on probable cause that a human or his property have been damaged, there is no crime possible.

Government hasn't any rights to violate as it is an artificial entity, without human rights. And, no creation of an artificial creation (the government) or of the people, has any human rights to be violated, and cannot lawfully sign an Affidavit of Truth.

The whole thing is a scam, from start to finish so the gurus should be flocking out there to help out this man and his family, and the others that are unlawfully "tried", as it would support the facts they give people for a price. Instead, they bicker amongst themselves, quote tens of thousands of statutes that mean absolutely nothing to the American People within the states, and continue inducing others to pay them for their findings, while attorneys simply demand money, and then make deals with their partners, other attorneys.

Not all fall into this but most do. And all fall into the below discussed "fraud upon the court" and the destruction of separation of powers.

So, I ask - where the hell are the gurus with all their expertise? And, this doesn't just refer to tax gurus but also the giants that allegedly understand the difference between federal and state jurisdiction, and the difference between liberty and servitude, and the difference between the one supreme Court, and the territorial District of Columbia's United States District Court.

Where are the experts on jurisdiction and the many frauds perpetrated by the government outside their jurisdiction? Fraud vitiates everything, and every claim made by the IRS is based on fraud, including fraud being that full disclosure is lacked. Fraud on the court is committed in every case, in which their is a "prosecuting attorney" as such did not even exist when the unanimous Declaration of Independence of the thirteen united States of America and the Constitution for the united States of America were written. Thus, such changes the court process and is therefore "fraud upon the court" established by Article III, and such has been defined by the justices in Bulloch v. United States, 763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985 and in Kenner v. C.I.R., 387 F.3d 689 (1968); and in 7 Moore's Federal Practice, 2d ed., p. 512, �60.23

Thus, the many treasons practiced by officials have led us to think that such actions and "courts" are lawful when they are as criminal as sticking a gun to someone's head demanding their money.

So, I want to know - where are the gurus when Americans are forced by armed and dangerous federal and local law enforcers to appear in non- and anti- constitutional courts to answer to "crimes" that cannot be defined as crimes in the system of justice and liberty established by our founders?

I do not care if you all answer this but what I am really interested in is answers from the alleged "gurus", as I can support every statement I made through American Jurisprudence, the unanimous Declaration of Independence, the Constitution for the united States of America, every state constitution, and through hundreds of supreme court opinions that I realize are not law but that every court must respond in accordance with unless overturned by a higher or equal Article III court of law.

Best regards,

ed lewis

----- Original Message -----

From: VictoryUSA@...

To: VictoryUSA@...

Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 9:53 PM

Subject: Nick Jesson Needs Encouragement

To: All JAILers

California JAILer, Nick Jesson, Needs Encouragement

Last month we put out a reminder to all California JAILers about Nick Jesson's court hearing, giving the date, time, and location, and encouraging as many as possible show up to give Nick and his lovely wife moral support in this oppressive battle. Here's what was sent:

R E M I N D E R

Nick Jesson's Criminal Tax Case Continued

to Friday, Nov. 21st 9:00 a.m.

Nick Jesson, Orange County JAILer, njesson@...,

was happy to see a number of people in attendance last Friday for his preliminary hearing in Dept. W17 of the Superior Court of Westminster, Orange County. His counsel requested a continuance to Friday, November 21st at 9:00 a.m. in order to review and study legal documents in preparation for the hearing.

Let's again show Nick our support by showing up at that time at the following location:

Superior Court

West Justice Center

8141 13th Street

Westminster CA

This is one block east of Beach Blvd., south of Westminster Blvd. and north of Hazard Avenue, in the City of Westminster in Orange County.

Dept. W17 is on the second floor at the rear portion of the courthouse.

Thanks to those who came last week, one from as far away as Simi Valley. We look forward to seeing more of you there November 21st.

-Barbie-

victoryusa@...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For those of you who don't know, Nick and his wife are under attack by the California Franchise Tax Board (the state equivalent of the IRS) and his original message below expresses what this has done to him.

The day AFTER we sent out the reminder, Nick emailed us and simply said "Please tell them not to come" without any explanation, as follows:

                         Hello Barbie, would you please e-mail everyone that you have e-mail about our case to please not come on the Nov.21st. Thank you, and may God always bless you and your family, sincerely
        Nick.

Although we had asked him for an explanation because the California JAILers deserved one, we didn't hear from Nick again until day before yesterday (Dec. 8th).

After reading the below, I felt that all JAILers should be aware of Nick's feelings and depression. All of us can empathize with Nick, and many of us can identify with what he is going through, having gone through similar circumstances.

I forward Nick's December 8th message below unedited, just as he wrote it, because of its sensitive nature. Nick will appreciate any words of encouragement as our hearts go out to him and Mrs. Jesson. His email address is NJesson@...

Thank you,

National JAIL4Judges

victoryusa@...

----- Original Message -----

From: Nick Jesson

To: 'VictoryUSA@...'

Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 7:01 PM

Subject: Explanation

                        Dear Ron and Barbie, I'm sorry for not responding before now. However let me see if I can explain

            what is going on.

                        First of all you must know that my children and family come first and for most, other than God. Second

            we are grateful for the few people that take their time to help support this issue. However that is the problem in

            it's self. Only a hand full of people care enough to show up in support.

                        For us that only hurts us because the Judge and DA will do their worse to us, just to show those few

            people what will happen to them if they do the same thing.

                        All of this is so disappointing to Trina and I. With all the groups out there and most of them for ten years

            and longer, no one can seem to get together more than a handful of people for support. What is needed is for

            10's and thousands of people to show up. However after all these groups being around for ten years and longer,

            if they cannot get more than a few people out, then they never will. Which makes it bad for those of us that are

            fighting for their rights and freedom because we are being picked off one by one.

                        When I started this researched ten years ago I believed in the American people and the future of our Country

            and children. I still believe in our children because they are to young to fight for themselves let alone know what's

            going on.

                        I not sure why these groups cannot get more than a handful of people together at one time, while I can see

            50,000 people turn out for other types of events. Even in Tennessee they had enough turn out there to stop the

            State tax. In fact in Tennessee the government cannot even get a conviction on anyone for taxes.

                        My children are only 9 and 11 and stand a great chance of losing the Mother and Father because I decided

            to help stop what I thought was illegal. Little did I know that they would ever turn this into a criminal case and little

            did I know that we would end up with so little support.

                        Over the years we have helped many others with money, travel and what every support we could give. Even

            after our raid 2 1/2 years ago our company has not made a profit in any month since then. You can guess why.

            However when we found out about Dick, we managed to get together at least $200.00 to help him. When Bob need

            money for the U.S.A. we sent him over $17,000.00, when Larry wanted to do his law suit on the 16th amendment

            we sent him $10,000.00 and there where many people we sent a few dollars to here and there.

                        Now since we are broke and cannot help even ourselves, we have heard from only a very few people. My

            e-mail list is over 300 people which I have e-mailed out 4 or 5 times asking for help so that we can hire a lawyer

            that will fight for us. Not one penny has come in nor have I even seen anyone put out a story about what happened

            to us.

                        My heart is truly broken over this, I have put my family and children in great danger thinking I was doing the

            right thing and that if ever needed we would have a lot of support from all over the Country. Now we feel like the lone

            ranger. My lovely wife only said it once, but that was enough, because she saw how hurt I was when she said it. Her

            statement was; where is all your support?

                        I can only thank God day and night for her, for she surely had nothing to do with any of this, yet she trusted

            me and now stands a chance of going to prison right along with me. With all of this and a chance of losing our children

            she is still by my side. She still holds me when I down, she stills smiles when all seems lose, her eyes still light up when

            she see me. And the only thing I can think of is how could I have gotten her into all this trouble. This has broken my

            heart so much that it is hard to even keep going from day to day.

                        We are not criminals, yet we are treated as so, and as I set here writing this e-mail,l you can believe the court

            will do everything they can legally or illegally to put both of use in prison.

                        I pray all day that God will send his Angles to protect us and that he would touch the hearts of thousands

            a pond thousands of people to show up and stop the illegal process of our system. I pray to God that for once that

            every group out there will bond together and have 50,000 people show up when one is in trouble. Without that the

            corruption will just keep getting worse and worse until every person is a slave or in prison.

                        I don't know what else to do any more, the lawyer we have and the only one we can make payments to will

            not fight the tax issue, they will only try and make some deal or they will drop the case. Well I'm sure you know

            what type of deal we will get.

                        The person we want to hire wants $75,000.00 up front, flat fee plus $15,000.00 for travel. Over the last

            2 1/2 years I have sold everything I could to keep this business going and to try and get new customers. However

            the F.T.B. keeps running their own media on us plus now they even put this on our company Dun & Brad credit

            report. That report states that Trina and I were arrested for tax evision and that the State is demanding $500,000.00.

            We have not even had a trial yet and the State has reported this on our company credit. Plus this is personal taxes

            the State is after, which was paid, and has nothing to do with company taxes. In fact the F.T.B. knew we had paid

            the tax for 1997 and 98 yet raided us anyway stating we had not paid. Once we proved that we had paid two out

            of the three years the search warrant covered they took 2 1/2 years to file criminal charges, now stating that we

            under reported what we made. So as you can see they will say or do anything they can and get away with it.

                        I hope this helps you to understand why I ask not to have anyone show up. I also hope you understand that

            until we can get 10,000 or more to stand up and show up they will keep picking us off one buy one.

                        May God always bless you and your family and keep them safe, sincerely, Trina, Nick, family and the lone

            ranger.

#764

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Sun Dec 14, 2003 3:55 am
Subject: * Ron & Barbie Coming To The East Coast

jail4judges@...

J.A.I.L. News Journal
_____________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California December 13, 2003

Ron & Barbie Coming To The East Coast Next Month!

What a marvelous opportunity that has been offered to J.A.I.L. through the auspices of Bob Schulz of We The People Foundation in New York! (bob@...). Mr. Branson, who will appear on the Sixth and final Panel of the conference, will address the solution to the denial of the Right To Petition for Redress of Grievances.

We encourage each of you to view the Preliminary Agenda at http://www.givemeliberty.org/convention/agenda.htm and see the line-up of impressive nationally-renowned public figures scheduled, among whom is Mr. Branson. We note in particular that U.S. Rep. Henry Hyde is one of the invited participants. When he was Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, he confirmed the fact that he received a copy of the Federal J.A.I.L. Bill when he wrote the following, almost four years ago:

(To: Tennessee Rep. John Duncan dated April 24, 2000)

Thank you for your recent letter on behalf of your constituent, Ms. Roberta Hamlin, regarding her request that the Judiciary Committee introduce a bill to address the issue of judicial corruption by federal judges. ..... I am happy to look over her proposed legislation [The Federal J.A.I.L. Bill] and take it into account when issues such as these come before the full Judiciary Committee.

Two years ago, Mr. Branson personally handed the proposed Federal J.A.I.L. Bill to U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, also a scheduled speaker at this conference. Many J.A.I.L. subscribers have told us that they, too, have sent the Bill to their representatives as well, so we know that Congress is well aware that we're "out here." By J.A.I.L. being represented at the WTP Conference in Arlington, Virginia, right next to the District of Criminals, the impact will certainly be felt at the whited sepulchres of D.C.

This first annual conference sponsored by the WTP organization, titled "Give Me Liberty 2004" is sure to be a wake-up call, not only to the People, but to the tyrants as well. Mr. Branson is certainly honored to be invited to participate at the inaugural WTP conference which is just the beginning of such events.

Won't all of you join us in giving Bob Schulz a round of applause for his splendid work in leading The People toward restoring this country to the Constitutional Republic that it was intended to be from the beginning, and for officially recognizing J.A.I.L. as part of that endeavor. What an honor it is!

Ron and Barbie

Judicial Accountability Initiative Law

Judicial Accountability & Integrity Legislation

www.jail4judges.org

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><

#765

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:53 am
Subject: Fighting the Good Fight, for Victory is Nigh

jail4judges@...

Fighting the Good Fight,

for Victory is Nigh

Hello David Nicholson. This is Ron Branson. Your below expressed concerns involve the wounded and the casualties of those who are taking on the usurpers of our government in a head-to-head confrontation. Fighting for truth and liberty in this manor will always result in casualties. Do I empathize with them? Absolutely! I too was once among that group of wounded for many years.

Understand, however, with J.A.I.L. we do not take on the usurpers of government in a "head-to-head" battle. There are no casualties or wounded among those advancing J.A.I.L., because of J.A.I.L. Quite the contrary, J.A.I.L. is challenging the system on an entirely different front.

What you are suggesting is that J.A.I.L. take on a relief effort of the casualties of war on the front lines that does not pertain to J.A.I.L. (Again, I express, it is not that we do not care about the casualties of others, as we certainly do. It is just that caring for the wounded is not J.A.I.L's function, and will never result in bringing about judicial accountability to the People of this country, which is J.A.I.L.'s only function and mission.)

I could hardly express to you the years of anguish and torture Barbie and I endured when we were in the midst of battle ourselves with the powers that be. We were stressed out to the limit. Every day was another horror. Every night involved sleepless thoughts about what was coming in the next day or two. Trips to the mailbox were very stressful. Barbie would literally fall apart. I had to pick her up off the floor. She would labor 13-1/2 hours every day in the law library seeking court cases that supported our position (and she found ever so many), but it was all for naught. Never did the judges or the government respect any of those cases or laws. We were finding ourselves fighting utter lawlessness. There was literally no end to the optimum stress while the usurpers, in the name of government, forged forward with their unfounded enforcement. Nothing stopped them. They would just roll over us mercilessly, leaving us too as "casualties along the road." We are personally well familiar with "being wounded" and left as road-kill by the mindless power-machine. However, we have learned through this experience that lasted some eighteen years. I realized that the problem was systemic and that the People needed a practical and workable solution. The admonition of George Washington came through loud and clear: "Government is not reason. Government is not eloquence. It is force; and, like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master!"

Then entered J.A.I.L., and the whole picture slowly changed. We had to admit defeat in our former efforts within the system, and turned to the J.A.I.L. solution. We began to run all of our former confrontations with government off the end to their logical conclusion at the United States Supreme Court, with no hint that we would receive redress of grievances. We realized that out of desperation and no remedy, we had to place all our eggs in the J.A.I.L. basket.

Now, all those who are fighting the way we used to do are flocking to us looking for a remedy. My suggestion to them is that they do just exactly what we did, i.e., place all their energy and all their effort into the passage of J.A.I.L., since nothing else will solve the problem. The powers that be have no way of defending themselves against J.A.I.L.

The last thing they want to do is bring attention to J.A.I.L.

J.A.I.L. is the offensive way to fight government, as a defensive method will never accomplish anything but casualties and more stress, into which you are asking us to return for the purpose of dragging out the wounded. With J.A.I.L., Victory is so easy and sure, and we suffer no casualties in the process.

Instead of charging the usurpers directly at their fully-protected fortresses, over which walls they will easily pick each one off, J.A.I.L. places the People inside the walls of the enemy's fortress behind the bureaucratic shooters, where the People can easily bring down the scaffolding that supports those firing over the walls. J.A.I.L. is not in the line of fire!

Believe it our not, government has for years told us their most vulnerable point, and the way to defeat them. They say, "If you don't like the government we have, go to the polls and change it!" Of course, they say this proudly in a cocky manner, thinking it will never happen.

Well, surprise to our enemies, this is precisely how J.A.I.L. shall defeat the enemies of our country through initiative states, to wit, "go to the polls and change it!" Then let us hear the haughtiness of the mighty, as we sing, "How are the mighty fallen..." II Sam. 1:27.

Ironically, it is the government that has properly described the only peaceable means to their demise, i.e., through the voting booth. Therefore, the only casualty one might risk in getting behind J.A.I.L. is tripping and falling on their way to the voting booth to give J.A.I.L. the Victory!

They thought it could never be done, but as Benjamin Franklin put it, behold, there is a God in heaven who rules over the affairs of men.

When J.A.I.L. prevails, we can thank all these bureaucratic government officials for telling us to go to the voting booth and change it.

How many times have you heard me say, "J.A.I.L. is the only answer?" You and your friends haven't enough fingers and toes to count. This is not a cliche, but reality. I ask you to implore those wounded that you want us to help, to flee to J.A.I.L., for why should they get shot up and become causalities in a battlefront they need not fight? If on a personal level someone wants to pass the basket for the truly needy, then that is a personal issue. Am I making sense?

Ron Branson

----- Original Message -----

From: david nicholson

To: VictoryUSA@...

Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 10:32 PM

Subject: Re: An idea for financial help

Hello Barbie,

Please allow me to add to my comments about financial help for individuals. Your point about financial help was not going to solve the problem is well taken, but my point was helping those who have been "wounded" in their fight to bring about a solution. How many organizations can you think of, besides churches, which do not help their own membership in time of need.

Are we going to ask people to join our J.A.I.L. organization and get involved, and because of their direct involvement, they find themselves financial stressed?

While we are attempting to create solutions, we shouldn't leave the wounded on the roads leading to those solutions. All I'm trying to say is isn't there a way we can pass the basket on a regular basis to help the truly needy?

Respectfully,

Dave

----- Original Message -----

From: VictoryUSA@...

To: dcnicholson@...

Cc: gageserve@...

Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 12:14 AM

Subject: Fw: An idea for financial help

Hello David: (NY J.A.I.L.)

This is Barbie responding. J.A.I.L. is not in the same league, or the same mission as SAP. J.A.I.L. is unique to all other patriot organizations in that (1) it isn't a patriot organization; it's for ALL the people, patriot or not; (2) it doesn't operate within the system, since the system is corrupt; (3) it will operate on the people's turf, independent of government.

Assisting patriots in working within the system (any department) is the antithesis of J.A.I.L. J.A.I.L. is designed to be operated by the people, outside of government, which is the only way the people can be in a position to hold judges accountable to them under constitutional rule. The people are not part of government-- they are superior to it. That's why J.A.I.L. doesn't touch the system at all. We can't approach the system and expect them to consent to being accountable to the people.

Working within the corrupt system is what all other organizations do-- hoping to get a semblance of justice. Reimbursement to the membership, while a nice consideration, is not going to correct the problem. We have to work on the solution-- not keep the problem ongoing. J.A.I.L.'s the only organization that is focused on the solution. The people must take control over this corrupt government, focusing on the judiciary which is the source of all corruption. Did you receive my recent JNJ - about how the judiciary has stolen our right to redress?

I explain it in there by using the "corrupt tree" as illustrating corrupt government, and the roots feeding the corrupt tree as the judicial system. Too many patriots want to continue fighting at the branch level (hacking at the branches) instead of curing the problem by cleaning out the root system with J.A.I.L. Organizations, such as SAP, say only educating the public is going to help-- the only problem with that is, educate them about what?? --continuing to fight the problem, or go after the cure? Read the JNJ "A Case Made for J.A.I.L." sent out a few days ago.

Thanks for your suggestion anyway. Hope you can make it to the WTP conference next month where Ron will be speaking on the 24th. Contact Bill Gage for more information. (gageserve@...)

-Barbie-

victoryusa@...

----- Original Message -----
From: david nicholson

To: VictoryUSA@...

Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 7:55 AM

Subject: An idea for financial help

Hello Ron,

Hope this finds you in good health and high spirits.

It seems everyday someone in the movement is asking for financial assistance in their fight against tyranny. Would you please consider a program similar to the one the Save-A-Patriot Fellowship has which on a monthly basis, extends to one of its members , the equivalent of $10.00 per member times the number of participating members in this program, called the Victory Express. It is estimated that each month, someone damaged by the corrupt system is actually rewarded to the tune of approx.. $150,000. Could you just imagine if we had 100,000 participating members in such a program, we could be creating a millionaire per month, but more importantly, the fight would take on a whole new perspective. The Fellowship can be reached at www.save-a-patriot.org .

Lord bless and have a blessed Christmas.

STAY THE COURSE!

Respectfully,

Dave Nicholson

NY. JAILer

dcnicholson@...

#766

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Wed Dec 17, 2003 4:55 am
Subject: * * Impunity Immunity * *

jail4judges@...

J.A.I.L. News Journal
_____________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California December 16, 2003

Impunity Immunity

Impunity Immunity

The Law�s for them, but not for me.

Strip their rights, ignore the rules

� the law is what I say (the fools.)

My mind�s made up. I�ll see no proof.

I�ll set their payments through the roof

Arrearages that I create.

Will make State bonus payments great.

U.S. Title Forty-two

Secures my robe and income too !

What �conflict� ? � Oh no, Not me.

I�m above reproach, you see.

Take their children. Take their money.

�Parental Rights� ? � I think it�s funny.

What recourse have they at all ?

�complain to my friends down the hall ?

Appeal me if you think you can.

The legal maze shall be your end.

One more hearing. Two more motions.

�True & Just� � forgotten notions.

Who dares put me to the test?

Disbar & break them (like the rest).

Want to press it ? You will see

just how futile it will be.

Foxes as the henhouse guard�

Care less whose rights I disregard.

Green incentives surely will

Keep dockets and state pockets filled.

Behind closed doors we shall decide

Who�ll �play ball� and join our side ?

Immunity: our strongest shield.

(My God� what power I now wield)

All may vote� in each election

yet none can thwart my insurrection.

Legislate all day and night

I�ll change it (when the time is right).

I must admit my greatest fear

is of a jury called to hear

how I�ve plundered citizens

And turned �the law� to my own ends.

Lawyers must step carefully

They may again stand before me

But, common folk with common sense

Who sit and hear the evidence�

All unknown until that day

They�d render verdicts then walk away.

How could I control them then ?

My reign would reach a sudden end.

A jury returns too much power

to �The People� I�ve devoured.

They�d hold me like an anchor to

the Constitution I eschew.

I shall remain (until that day)

The King of all that I survey.

- Brutus -

Author: Lee Williams

lwilliams888@...

(Published by permission)

#767

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Tue Dec 23, 2003 4:09 am
Subject: A Judge With Salt, Takes a Stand!

jail4judges@...

J.A.I.L. News Journal
_______________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California December 22,, 2003

A Judge With Salt,

Takes a Stand!

FREE TRADE MEETING

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/7538538.htm
Dec. 20, 2003

Judge: I saw police commit felonies

A judge who said he witnessed some of the anti-free trade protests
complains in open court about how police handled the demonstrations.

By AMY DRISCOLL
adriscoll@...

A judge presiding over the cases of free trade protesters said in court
that he saw ''no less than 20 felonies committed by police officers''
during the November demonstrations, adding to a chorus of complaints
about police conduct.

Judge Richard Margolius, 60, made the remarks in open court last week,
saying he was taken aback by what he witnessed while attending the
protests.

''Pretty disgraceful what I saw with my own eyes. And I have always
supported the police during my entire career," he said, according to a
court transcript. "This was a real eye-opener. A disgrace for the
community."

In the transcript, he also said he may have to remove himself from any
additional cases involving arrests made during the Free Trade Area of
the Americas summit. ....

CIRCUIT JUDGE

Margolius, appointed to the bench in 1982, retired as a circuit judge in
2001 but said he still hears cases 15 to 20 weeks a year when courts are
overburdened.

On Friday, he chose not to elaborate on the remarks he made from the
bench Dec. 11.

''I can't comment on pending cases," he said. "It was inappropriate for
me to make the comments I made. A reasonable person could question my neutrality because of statements I made in open court."

The judge did not single out a police department. More than three dozen
agencies were part of the FTAA security effort. The Miami Police
Department coordinated most police operations. ....

During the Dec. 11 hearings, the judge asked an assistant state attorney, "How many police officers have been charged by the State Attorney so far for what happened out there during the FTAA?"

None, the prosecutor replied.

''None?" asked the judge. "Pretty sad commentary. At least from what I
saw."

The judge also wondered aloud how much the ''whole episode'' had cost
taxpayers.

''I know one thing. There were police officers from every agency -- I
couldn't believe the sheer numbers," he said. ....

Two citizens' panels plan to hold a joint meeting Jan. 15 to hear
comments and complaints about police conduct during the FTAA, and both Miami-Dade and Miami police are conducting internal reviews. ....

Herald staff writer Charles Rabin contributed to this report.

#768

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Thu Dec 25, 2003 1:19 am
Subject: Prevailing Through Neutrality

jail4judges@...

J.A.I.L. News Journal
_____________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California December 24, 2003

Prevailing Through Neutrality

(By Ron Branson, Founder of J.A.I.L.)

Michael O'Brian, the National Vice Chair of the American Founding Father's Party, writes J.A.I.L. as per below. J.A.I.L.'s response follows O'Brian's offer:

----- Original Message -----

From: Michael O'Brian Sr.

To: victoryusa@...

Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2003 4:56 PM

Subject: Reciprocal Link Request

To Whom It May Concern At; http://www.jail4judges.org/national_002.htm

By way of introduction my name is Michael O'Brian Sr. and I am the National Vice Chair of the America Founding Fathers Party, a political Organization. We, along with you and many others today, are involved in the same fight to see America STAY America, the Land of the Free. We are opposed to the current rush by some in our government to take us down the path of socialism, from the unconstitutional income tax to our Second Amendment Right to self-defense. From the adoption of the Neo-Con concepts of Foreign Trade and Empire building, to the blatant corruption in our supposed courts of law! Judicial tyranny in America today is a seminar unto itself!

As a Co-Leader in the fight to return our Great Nation to it's Constitutional roots, we write to you today to request a Reciprocal Link between our two Web sites. We ask that you help us to help you in our common struggle to preserve our Constitutional America by establishing an "Educational" Link to our Web site. We will in-turn place your site on our "Friendly Links" page.

Please, examine our Platform on our Web site. While we are still constructing some aspects of this Great Document, we are pleased with what we have to this point and believe you will appreciate it as well.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns that you may have.

Michael O'Brian Sr.
Chairman AFFPMI
National V. Chair AFFP

Viet Nam Veteran
390 E. Beechwood Dr.
Adrian, Michigan 49221
(517) 266-0843
www.americafoundingfathersparty.org
mobsr@...

"I am only one, but I am one.
I cannot do everything, but I can do something.
What I can do, I should do and,
with the help of God, I will do." - Edward Everett Hale

2nd req.

Hello, Michael O'Brian:

This is Ron Branson, the National J.A.I.L. Commander-In-Chief. I have read your offer to J.A.I.L. below, and wish to comment thereon. I have no doubt that we are in pursuit of the same goals in this country, and that is good.

J.A.I.L. receives many such requests as yours from other organizations, generally those involved in income tax issues. Here is how I respond to them. J.A.I.L. is not per se a patriot group. We are just plain citizens from every walk of life, all political parties, from the left to the right philosophically, some currently working within government, some retired from government. There is not an area that J.A.I.L. does not touch. J.A.I.L.'s singular goal is giving all people a means of enforcement of the U.S. Constitution, all State Constitutions, and all laws made, or which shall be made in pursuance thereof, within all courts of this nation, both state and federal. J.A.I.L. is a one size fits all! Its application addresses all agendas, all causes, all organizations, all coalitions, and all political parties. It's objective is "Liberty and Justice for All!" And what cause or agenda is there that can prevail in the absence of Liberty and Justice for All? Not one! Truth and integrity is the substance of all societies!

It will come as no surprise to you when I tell you that when we succeed in getting J.A.I.L. on the ballot across this nation, the powers that be will go into full swing and pull out the stops, spending huge amounts of money to seek the defeat J.A.I.L. in and effort to preserve their firm grasp on the profits of their corruption. If it were found on our website material or links to an "anti-tax" effort, J.A.I.L. would be labeled unjustly as a bunch of tax protesters. I have yet to see any of these group leaders that have approached J.A.I.L. fail to understand this reasoning.

Now in your case, you are a registered political party. As I stated above, J.A.I.L. has members from all political parties, and we welcome them all. But this is the very reason why J.A.I.L. cannot show any leaning towards any one political party. Perhaps you and I could find cause to disagree with some of these parties, but that is a personal matter, not the concern of J.A.I.L. We must remain completely neutral when it comes to political parties. For J.A.I.L. to endorse one party to the exclusion of other parties would mark our demise and bring down J.A.I.L's cause. I'm sure you can clearly understand what I am saying.

I have little doubt that a number of your party members will eventually be joining in the National J.A.I.L. effort. As far as we are concern, your entire party can join J.A.I.L., and in such case, J.A.I.L. will set forth that fact by way of announcement to all. By doing this, no one in another party can accuse us of prejudice or bias, for we are only announcing a fact. And likewise, any other party could do the same, and I would announce it. A political party joining J.A.I.L. does not constitute J.A.I.L. joining that political party. I would like to see all political parties getting officially behind and endorsing J.A.I.L.

Eventually, I anticipate public pressure will be upon certain political parties to formally endorse J.A.I.L.'s efforts because they deem it consistent with their objectives and goals. I could name one, but I shall refrain. I am available to speak at State or National Political Conventions so long as it be understood that my appearance does not constitute a J.A.I.L. endorsement of that party. I've already done this.

In conclusion, I do thank you for taking the time to write me and make such an offer. For the above reasons, J.A.I.L. is unable to accept your offer. Notwithstanding this fact, J.A.I.L. in turn asks you and your political party, American Founding Fathers Party, to endorse J.A.I.L.

Thank you so very much, Michael, and God bless you.

Ron Branson

Nat'l J.A.I.L. Commander-In-Chief

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><

#769

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Fri Dec 26, 2003 3:03 am
Subject: * * * Objective: CONVICTIONS - Not Justice!

jail4judges@...

J.A.I.L. News Journal
______________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California December 25, 2003

Objective: CONVICTIONS -

Not Justice!

Prosecutors Not Penalized, Lawyer Says
New York Times
December 17, 2003
By ANDREA ELLIOTT

A lawyer who won the largest wrongful conviction settlement in the city's history said yesterday that during his investigation he uncovered dozens of cases of prosecutorial misconduct in the Bronx district attorney's office that did not result in disciplinary action. ....

Officials in the district attorney's office denied that prosecutorial misconduct was frequent or went unpunished. They said that in the 72 cases that Mr. Rudin highlighted, sanctions might have been issued that were not reflected in the prosecutors' personnel records. ....

Mr. Rudin's client, Alberto Ramos, won a $5 million settlement this month, 11 years after he was released from prison because of a wrongful conviction in a child sex abuse case. In the 1992 reversal, the judge found that the trial prosecutor had withheld evidence that most likely
would have exonerated Mr. Ramos. He later filed a civil suit, but to win damages from a jury he needed to prove that the prosecutor's actions were caused by a policy or practice of misconduct in the district attorney's office. The city settled on Sept. 4.

The withholding of exculpatory evidence and other forms of prosecutorial misconduct are problems in courts nationwide, legal experts say. There is disagreement about whether offending prosecutors are sanctioned often or severely enough, but the lack of disciplinary action by the Bronx district attorney in dozens of cases where misconduct was cited - with some prosecutors, repeatedly - is evidence of a policy of tolerance, Mr. Rudin said.

"Here you have people with the power to destroy lives, and when they do it by withholding evidence, there is no sanction," he said.

Officials in the Bronx district attorney's office said that the citings were not conclusive evidence that misconduct occurred willfully, or that a pattern existed, given the high volume of felony cases tried in the 21-year period - about 100,000.

Others in the legal profession said that misconduct was sometimes a necessary part of the learning curve. "Everybody makes mistakes - if we have a zero-tolerance policy in the legal profession, everyone is going to get disbarred," said Joshua K. Marquis, district attorney of Astoria, Ore., and a member of the board of directors of the National District Attorneys Association.

The cases that Mr. Rudin highlighted involved 74 prosecutors - 14 of whom were cited for misconduct in several cases. In one such case, a prosecutor who was hired in 1978 and retired in 1984 was cited for prosecutorial misconduct in the appellate decisions of five criminal
cases.

He was singled out in a manslaughter reversal in 1985 for "confusing and misleading the jury." In that ruling, the judge recalled the prosecutor's cited misconduct in another manslaughter case that had been reversed and concluded that his conduct and actions "can only be viewed as willful and deliberate."

But according to his personnel records, his salary continued to rise steadily until he retired, and included merit raises and bonuses.

Eighteen of the 72 cases involved prosecutors withholding evidence that might have helped the defendant. All 18 cases were overturned.

Among them was People v. Lantigua, a murder case that went to trial in 1992. The case depended on a sole witness who allegedly saw the murder from her window. Prosecutors argued that she was alone and had no distraction, when the witness had confided to one of the prosecutors before the trial that she had "snuck out" to meet a man.

The judge said the failure to disclose the conversation was "especially egregious." The prosecutors were never sanctioned, according to their personnel records, Mr. Rudin said.

Mr. Ramos was 21 years old and a part-time employee at the Concourse Day Care Center in the Bronx when, in 1984, he was arrested and charged with raping a 5-year-old girl whose class he helped supervise. While in prison, Mr. Ramos, 40, said he endured beatings, was sodomized and tried to commit suicide several times.

"Every day for me was hell," Mr. Ramos said in an interview at his attorney's office. Mr. Ramos, who recently left the military and wants to be a chef, said he did not want to talk about the millions he won.

"I don't think it's really about the money," said Mr. Ramos, sitting upright in a crisply ironed blue shirt and tie, his hands folded tightly in front of him. "I think it's about an injustice done to a minority who didn't have the funds of someone who was better off."

Mr. Ramos's conviction largely rested, Mr. Rudin said, on the testimony of one of the doctors, who said the girl would not have been able to describe in such detail what happened to her if she had not been abused.

What the jury never heard was testimony from day care center workers that the girl had masturbated frequently in class and had extensive knowledge of sexual acts prior to the alleged abuse. They also never heard testimony that the child had told city social workers that Mr. Ramos had done nothing to her.

The trial prosecutor, Diana Farrell, had the obligation to make this evidence known to the defense, and failed to do so, according to the 1992 reversal. Officials of the district attorney's office said they were not at liberty to discuss whether any disciplinary action was taken against
Ms. Farrell. Repeated efforts to get in touch with Ms. Farrell, who is no longer with the district attorney's office, were unsuccessful.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/17/nyregion/17PROS.html?ex=1072670719&ei=1&en=db1

On authority of one having worked within the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office for near two decades, there was a competitive spirit of racking up convictions not only among the inner-office Deputy District Attorneys, but among the various District Attorney's Offices throughout Los Angeles County. It ran like a competitive chess game.

This publisher has in his early archives an article on the District Attorney's Offices within the State of Texas competing on racking up points among the Deputies for those acquiring the most years of sentencing. The rules were that each year of total sentencing constituted a point. Even the judges got into the game, sentencing some at his pleasure for over 1000 years to help certain Deputies rack up their points.

When one thinks that we are here talking about families and lives being ruined at the expense of Deputy District Attorneys seeking to win a game, it is unthinkable. Yes, and for the sake of winning these type of games as an unspoken policy, practice, and custom, the taxpayers pay for housing such people for life, or even multiple life sentences, while hiding exculpatory evidence that should have been revealed.

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><

#770

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Fri Jan 16, 2004 8:24 am
Subject: What Can I Do To Help You? (New MI. JAILer)

jail4judges@...

What Can I Do To Help You?

(By Peter Shefman, new Michigan JAILer, pshefman@...)

----- Original Message -----

From: Peter Shefman

To: VictoryUSA@...

Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 3:15 AM

Subject: What can I do to help you?

Hello Ron:

My name is Peter Shefman. I have lived in Ann Arbor, Michigan, County of Washtenaw, for the better part of twenty five years. I have completed university and post graduate specialty.

I uncovered the court injustice many years ago and observed their illegal maneuvers, i.e. intimidation, misrepresentation, and ultimately corruption; it was soon evident no matter how I succeeded, they simply changed the rules and guidelines.

The judges abused their discretion and my attorney's sabotaged my cases, several succumbed to intimidation by the court. What was clear, it was decided from the start that I would lose whatever matter irrespective of the facts or law.

It has improperly cost me almost everything I worked so hard for over 20 years in Michigan: loss of all my civil rights, severe injury to all of my health (hospitalized last month for chest pain and forced to appear in court against my physicians advice for what I was told was a status conference). It turned out to be severe abusive motions with no notice. My legal counsel withdrew, and I was denied proper notice to respond, and no representation. Forced to accept an unfair settlement under duress because of the unfair risks I was placed in.

I was devastated, and did not know what was going on, or what to do. Most people don't even know what is going on, but I do now, and I want to expose this corruption. I hope you have a way that will really make a difference.

Respectfully

Peter Shefman

pshefman@...

Dear Peter:

First I wish to welcome you as a new JAILer to Michigan. Boy do I know that Mr. Dan Benham, drbehham@..., the JAILer-In-Chief (JIC) for Michigan is going to do headstands and cartwheels when he receives this.

I have to give thanks for all those judges out there promoting J.A.I.L. Without their help J.A.I.L. would be nothing. Judges are our greatest recruiters for the cause of Judicial Accountability. Because of them, we have a looong waiting line just to get on our mailings.

You are a prime example to this. They have opened your eyes, and now you see, and you have come home to J.A.I.L. where you belong. As these judges do their dirty work hundreds of thousands of times over, they keep swelling or ranks all over this country, as judicial corruption is universal. We are a national family of assorted victims of judges, and few have not experienced the same sort of treatment which you received.

Dan Benham will be more than happy to tell you what you can do to help. I'm sure he will find a leadership position for you somewhere within Michigan. God bless you, dear one.

-Ron Branson

www.jail4judges.org

#772

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Sat Jan 31, 2004 8:34 pm
Subject: Back From The WTP Conference

jail4judges@...

J.A.I.L. News Journal
_____________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California January 31, 2004

Back From The WTP* Conference

*(We The People)

You've heard the saying "Nice to be back." Well, this is especially true regarding one factor-- WEATHER! We left 20-degree weather with drizzle on Tuesday close to 1:00 pm (delayed one hour) from BWI Maryland, with a stop in Norfolk VA, and then on to Las Vegas where we switched planes (barely made the connection due to the delay), and landed in southern California where it was 57 degrees at 5:15 pm Tuesday evening, just getting dark.

A member of the Save-A-Patriot organization in Maryland asked if Ron would be able to speak at their meeting on Saturday evening in Westminster MD, about 1-1/2 hours' drive from Arlington. One of our Virginia JAILers was kind enough to offer to be our "wheels" for us while we were there and even volunteered to drive us to the SAP meeting and back again to the Arlington area where we spent a few more days. On Sunday, our "chauffeur" drove us around the DC area and through "Ambassador Row" and Georgetown.

That drive through DC left a chilling effect on me (more than just the weather). That effect has actually grown since arriving home, having the vision come back to mind time and time again like a recurring nightmare. It made me realize, by actually seeing it, the hugeness of the monster controlling us, just by seeing the monster's housing covering block after block, row upon row of huge edifices, one after another in every direction. I viewed the beautiful monuments through eyes of depression, knowing the monster was right there. I knew we were in enemy territory, but how many people realize it? We drove by the Supreme Court building and it was blocked up like a fortress. Police were all over the place, sitting in squad cars with their lights flashing. Again, it was a chilling effect. I realized I was not in friendly territory, just looking around.

You don't begin to get the picture just by watching TV-- you have to be there! The White House was not a picture of park-like rolling green lawns (or even a snowy lawn) and trees with an occasional squirrel scampering about as seen behind reporters on TV. We could not even drive by it-- the road was blocked. We had to view it by glimpses at a distance between commercial buildings. DC was a dreadfully awesome sight and feeling. It felt "foreign" --not like home. Visiting foreign monsters, like Red Square or The Hague, would not be as dreadful since they aren't controlling our people. We could view them and say "Thank goodness this isn't in our country." But did DC give me that warm and fuzzy feeling of home? of freedom and liberty? of domestic tranquility? of pride in being an American? I hate to tell you.

Both Ron and I had profusely poured out our thanks and appreciation to Bob Schulz and to Devvy Kidd for all the blood, sweat (despite the cold temps), and I'm sure-- tears, for what they had done to make this event possible. Bob even commented that Devvy was close to suffering a heart attack about three times during preparations (he was smiling as he said that, so thankfully he was kidding), and one of the speakers commented that Devvy was like a squirrel in an acorn tree. That pretty well described it. By the way, Devvy Kidd attended the very first fundraiser for J.A.I.L. (then called the Judicial Reform Act of 1996 - JRA) at the Airtel Hotel in Van Nuys, as did John Wolfgram, another speaker at the Conference.

This was the first of a planned annual event, and I'm sure it was a learning experience with the road being a bit bumpy on its maiden schedule. Let's let them know how much we appreciate the opportunities they give to other Freedom Warriors. I don't want to leave out the fact that we also had the pleasure of meeting Mrs. Schulz (Judy) as well.

Our lasting memories of this trip will be pleasant ones-- of the Conference and all the people we were able to meet and talk to while there. It was a wonderful opportunity for J.A.I.L.

-Barbie-

victoryusa@...

#773

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Thu Feb 12, 2004 7:07 am
Subject: * * * Righteousness Exalteth A Nation" * * *

jail4judges@...

J.A.I.L. News Journal
______________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California February 11, 2004

"Righteousness Exalteth A Nation" Prov. 14:34

(By Ron Branson, J.A.I.L Author/Founder)

It is no secret that various channels are being put into effect by J.A.I.L. to obtain a personal audience with Governor Schwarzenegger in an attempt to assist him in his endeavor to help restore California. I have pointed out that his goal is impossible to achieve without our help, and that he needs us much more that we need him. As a result of our publication of this fact, we received the following from Boston, Mass., "I'm not sure I understand how J.A.I.L. is going to help the governor, can you please clarify? Have a great day. God Bless you, Denise"

basicsoul7@...

This is a reasonable inquiry that I wish to address for our readers. Does anyone care to debate the issue that California is in a heap of trouble due to its corruption, fraud, and oppression in every way thinkable? We have the highest paid bureaucrats in the nation, the highest retirement benefits to the same, the largest boondoggle of a public school system, the highest taxes and unemployment, the worst worker's compensation program, the highest accumulation of lawyers on earth, the largest prison industry, and so on and so forth.

Of all the litigation coming before the U.S. Supreme Court, most arise out of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers eleven states. Of all these eleven states, most litigation originates from California. (And as a side bar, the vast majority of these cases arise out of the Second Appellate District, i.e., Los Angeles.) I have had the sad experience of receiving my legal "education" right here in the heart of the beast where judicial influence, bribery and scams abound.

Governor Schwarzenegger, while shocked at what he has already discovered, has not seen the half of what he is faced with. He has said that if he has to, he will go directly to the people with citizen's initiatives, and that is just exactly what he will have to do, but his current Proposition 57 & 58 initiative now on the ballot to borrow an additional $15 Billion, plus interest to be saddled on our children and grand-children for years to come, is not the answer. It will only enhance California's problems in the long run.

I have quoted a basic truth that is true of every era, every nation, all societies, and in all circumstances. This truth cannot be averted, and that is that "Righteousness exalteth a nation." Webster's dictionary defines exalt as, to raise high, to elevate in character, praise, estimation, glory, and to induce exaltation.

By antithesis, corruption, fraud and oppression always destroy a nation. This same principle applies to states as well as to a nation. Without righteousness, no state can achieve exaltation. Thus, it is certain that Schwarzenegger can never "raise high," or "elevate" California without a real and workable direct system of accountability to the People that has teeth.

I am asked how J.A.I.L. will help the governor. If that question is asked from the perspective of how he will fare with the existent government and legislature, it won't help him because they will be vehemently opposed to what he absolutely must do. He must return power directly back into the hands of the People if he expects to elevate California.

Now, what will J.A.I.L. do for California, or for this nation, for that matter? I have been very careful on this point because I have not wished to awaken a self-confident arrogant sleeping giant who fears no harm. As far as the powerful are concerned, I would rather they perceive us as just a chit-chat group of disgruntled slaves that expresses only grandeurs of hope, while posing no actual or real threat to their future security. On the other hand, I am offering hope to the hopeless. So I walk this thin line of offering people hope, while "posing no threat" to the status quo.

The plan is to come upon our enemies as sudden as an instant heart attack, leaving them to wonder what happened. (Ever notice how I say very little on the subject of the New World Order and one other unmentionable subject?) Am I sly? Do I know more than I put on? Do I have effective long-range plans? I will leave you to formulate your own opinions.

Basically, J.A.I.L., apart from advanced technology, will wind back the clock to when the Constitution governed our nation, judges obeyed their oaths to uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies, and when laws were few and respected and had a genuine purpose rather than generating revenue and imposing oppression upon the people. People were then respected by those whom we elected.

We have ventured so far off base from the Constitution for so many years that most people have no idea of what a constitutionally limited government is, and would fear the radical change. For instance, can you imagine receiving a jury trial in every case in which the government came after you, and had to justify its aggression before an unfettered jury? The Constitution says, "...the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury..." When's the last time you received a jury trial in a traffic court? family court? bankruptcy court? so-called "administrative courts," etc. They are non-existent. The courts have arbitrarily determined you are not entitled to a jury trial.

Our Founding Fathers were aggrieved with these very things when they unanimously signed the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776. Let us revisit a few of their grievances. "He has obstructed the administration of justice .... He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance. ... He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies [Homeland Security] .... He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution [administrative laws] .... For protecting them [troops], by a mock trial, from punishment.... For imposing taxes on us without our consent .... For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury.... abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments .... and waging war against us.

Once a young man asked me something like this. How would we keep our government going if we operated like you are suggesting? I responded, that's a good point. How would we survive if we did not have all this government breathing down our back everywhere, telling us what we can and can not do, licenses and taxing us every step of the way, fining us if we do not obey, and punishing us if we detest them?

He responded, I didn't think of it in that light.

Imagine living in an atmosphere where you could think and act for yourself, being responsible for your own actions; where you could actually defend yourself and your property per Article I of the California Constitution, "All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy."

This sounds too frightening, doesn't it? "Gee, you mean I have to make decisions for myself and be responsible for my own actions? I don't think I can handle this. It does not fit my way of thinking. I want the government to think for me, to protect me, and to be responsible for my actions. I just would not know what to do with this kind of Liberty. Yes, and I wouldn't get my Social Security check, Food Stamps, etc."

Honestly, I think if I were to inform most people on the reality of the extent J.A.I.L. would benefit California and Gov. Scharzenegger, they would be beside themselves, and so I just as soon let them experience it, and not hear the fullness thereof.

Our greatest problem in California is ignorance, "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee." Hosea 4: 6.

I intend to move this nation through the accountability that J.A.I.L. will bring towards integrity, truth, and godly principles, apart from party politics, and without pressuring anyone in the way of religion.

Truly J.A.I.L will bring about the fulfillment of Prov. 28: 28, and 29: 2, "When the wicked rise, men hide themselves: but when they perish, the righteous increase." "When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn." If we care for California / America, and want to increase godly men in it, then it's time to turn toward the goodness J.A.I.L. offers. "Righteousness exalteth a nation." -Ron Branson

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><

#774

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Mon Feb 16, 2004 3:10 am
Subject: Judges: To Elect, or to Appoint?

jail4judges@...

J.A.I.L. News Journal
______________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California February 15, 2004

Judges: To Elect, or to Appoint?

Feb. 13, 2004, 12:20AM

Lying judge defends system

Time was when a pronouncement by Steve Mansfield could make headlines and change lives.

That was when he sat on the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, the state's highest court for criminal matters.

But this week, when Mansfield opined about gay marriage in Massachusetts in a letter to the editor of this newspaper, his remarks drew little attention.

And from many of those who recognized who he was, the letter provoked giggles.

The point of Mansfield's letter was that the 4-3 decision by the Massachusetts Supreme Court mandating the recognition of gay marriages constitutes a powerful argument in favor of the Texas system of electing judges.

"The main reason why Texas does not have a problem with activist judges acting like legislators in black robes is that Texas judges are accountable to the voters," Mansfield wrote. "In Massachusetts, judges are appointed for life and are thus free to rule however they see fit."

"Liberal activists know that the only way they can abolish the death penalty, remove religion from public life and impose gay marriage is through an unaccountable judiciary," he continued. "That is why Texans must not give up the right to elect our judges lest we become like Massachusetts."

Fallacies abound in his argument, but first let me explain why some giggled at his letter.

It is precisely this: Before he sank into obscurity after leaving the high court in 2000 and losing a bid to regain his seat in 2002, Mansfield was a poster boy for what is wrong with electing judges.

During Mansfield's campaign for office in 1994, he was caught in multiple lies:

� He said his background was "primarily criminal defense," but in fact had done very little criminal defense work. His job when he decided to run was as an in-house insurance lawyer.

� He said he was a Texas native. He was born in Massachusetts and moved to Houston in the 1980s and wasn't licensed to practice here until 1992.

� He had paid a fine for unauthorized practice of law in Florida and was once charged with marijuana possession in Boston.

� He said he had never run for public office. He had twice run for Congress in New England.

These and other embarrassing facts were published during the campaign. Yet while spending only $10,000, Mansfield beat a better-qualified Republican in the primary and then ousted the Democratic incumbent.

Mansfield himself expressed "shock, surprise and disbelief" at his victory.

He won for two reasons. One was that because the Court of Criminal Appeals handles only cases where no money awards are involved; plaintiff's lawyers and big business don't contribute to candidates. As a result, voters know little to nothing about candidates.

The second reason Mansfield won was that he rode George W. Bush's coattails in ousting Gov. Ann Richards.

So much for Mansfield's record. Now for his argument.

He says appointed judges are more likely to be "activist" in making law, rather than interpreting it.

But Texas has had its share of activist judges, both liberal and conservative. Judicial activism clearly can come not just from arrogance, but from a desire to pander to voters or major campaign contributors.

Mansfield also suggests that it is "liberal activists" who want to change the Texas system.

While some liberals have backed appointive systems, the leadership for appointing judges has come from Texas Supreme Court Chief Justice Tom Phillips and state Sen. Robert Duncan and state Rep. Elizabeth Ames Jones -- all Republicans.

Good arguments can be made for the elective system, but Mansfield didn't come close.

You can write to Rick Casey at P.O. Box 4260, Houston, TX 77210, or e-mail him at rick.casey@....

Whether to elect judges or to appoint judges is not relevant to the judicial problems facing America today. In either case, judges are not responsible for their actions whatsoever by reason of their self-created doctrine of judicial immunity. If elections assured honesty and integrity, then America should have the finest politicians that money could buy. (Pun intended.)

Lord Acton said, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Without accountability of judges, whether elected or appointed, we assure corrupt and activist judges will be running this country. Only J.A.I.L. assures a non-political system by which judges will be directly accountable to the people, and hence, America's future freedom and security directly rests upon the passage of J.A.I.L.

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><

#775

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Fri Feb 20, 2004 1:37 am
Subject: Fmr. Wash. D.C. Employee Praises J.A.I.L.

jail4judges@...

Former Washington, D.C. Federal Employee Praises J.A.I.L.

(By Wendy Ghannam, desert_rose72@...)

Ron's Response Below

(Dated 2/19/04)

----- Original Message -----

From: Desert Rose

To: VictoryUSA@...

Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 3:50 AM

Subject: Corrupt Legal System

Hello Mr. Ron Branson,

My name is Wendy and I live in one of the outside suburbs of Washington, DC. I read through parts of your website with great interest today, and wanted to share the following with you:

As a former federal civil servant, I have been made part of a formidable
pattern of abuse and neglect within the federal system guidelines of the
U.S. Gov't. When I lost my position at the agency where I formerly worked (USAID), [U.S. Agency for International Development] I immediately set forth to enter into the available redress avenue afforded to most federal employees -- the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Therefore, I don't know if you are aware of it or not, but after nearly ten
years of legal redress avenues being set forward, I have discovered that the EEOC is made up with one of the most pervasive itineraries of corrupt administrative judge officials that I have ever seen in my entire life.

Following my own administrative hearing on my job discrimination matters in 1998, I witnessed for myself bribery money being extended to the hearing administrative judge on behalf of USAID legal officials!! At the time, I figured I could do nothing about it except to hope for a proper outcome of my case.

Over the years, I have learned that what I saw and witnessed is not an
isolated incidence. Therefore, other people have experienced much of the same, especially within the federal work service spectrum.

Our legal system is corrupt beyond measure in this country today!! I applaud you in your efforts to stop this treacherous system as quickly as possible.

Also, I have written about my own personal account in my book, WEB of BETRAYAL -- which spells out to every American what is going on within the EEOC discrimination avenue system, and what it means for the average person today. I am right there with you. Something has got to be done about this.

Many thanks for reading this e-mail.

Wendy Ghannam/Wash. DC
desert_rose72@...

P.S. My website is: http://www.Betrayals.net

Dear Wendy:

We are so happy to have received your communications from Washington, D.C. I've been told that "D.C." stands for the "District of Criminals." In any case, your testimony tends to support such a finding.

We are always pleased to find people in whatever profession or location they are in who show excitement about J.A.I.L. We are a nationwide grassroots movement of people from all walks of life who has suffered the same types of frustration you've experienced with the current system of "Justice" so-called. We have decided take effective and decisive action to change it. I am interpreting your enthusiasm as a willingness to join with us in that effort.

I am adding you not only to our J.A.I.L. News Journals, but also to our National JAILers List in which you may interchange thoughts and experiences with others such as yourself.

That said, let me be the first in line to welcome you as a Washington, D.C. JAILer. You will now find yourself inundated with all kinds of letters from JAILers welcoming you to the fold, some of which will relate well very with your experiences.

Next, I wish to say that in consideration of your experiences in Washington, D.C., and our current lack of J.A.I.L. presence within those ten square miles, I would like to ask you to consider becoming our Washington, D.C. JIC. (That stands for "JAILer-In-Chief.")

The duties of JIC in Washington, D.C. differs a bit from those held by the JICs throughout the states, in that there is no state Constitutional Amendment to be advanced. Rather, it is influencing Congressmen to sponsor and keep on focus the passage of the Federal J.A.I.L. Bill (see below) just as it is written. As such, you would not be subject to any of the Lobbyist laws because it would be your voluntary effort. You would eventually be known by all the Congress Critters under the dome, whether they like it or not.

Just let me know if you wish to take up this challenge for our entire country. I am very sure if you make this choice, you will not only gain popularity under the dome, but also by progress reports you send us worthy of publication to the nation. You are being offered a position that will have your finger on the pulse of the excitement of this nation.

Also, should you accept this position of JIC, you will have the authority to appoint a downline delegation of your authority to assist you in this cause. For instance, imagine recruiting, delegating and commanding a potential Team of a hundred-something JAILers within Washington, D.C. swarming on Capitol Hill. God forbid, say some of the Congressmen, but keep as your guide the words of Luke 18:2-5, "There was in a city a judge, which feared not God, neither regarded man: And there was a widow in that city; and she came unto him, saying, Avenge me of mine adversary. And he would not for a while: but afterward he said within himself, Though I fear not God, nor regard man; Yet because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me."

God bless you, Wendy. We shall be waiting to hear from you.

Ron Branson

P.S. - Below is the Federal Judicial Accountability & Integrity Legislation Bill you will be called upon to push tirelessly into the face of the Congressmen.

~ ~ ~

Judicial Accountability & Integrity Legislation

(Version 9/1/03)

(a) Preamble. The House of Representatives and Senate Assembled find: that an inordinate and ever-growing number of complaints for willful misconduct have been lodged with Congress involving federal judges across this nation; that the current Title 28 U.S.C. �372(c) (Judicial Misconduct and Disability Act) is in many cases inadequate due to conflicts of interest of judges judging themselves; that judicial integrity is of major importance which affects all areas of our American society. Be it therefore resolved that the House of Representatives and Senate Assembled hereby enact the following legislation which shall be known as the "Judicial Accountability and Integrity Legislation."

(b) Definitions. For purposes of this statute:

1. The term "blocking" shall mean any act that impedes the lawful conclusion of a case, to include unreasonable delay and willful rendering of a void judgment or order.

2. The term "federal judge" or "judge" shall mean any federal justice, judge, magistrate, commissioner, or any person shielded by judicial immunity.

3. The term "Juror" shall mean a Special Federal Grand Juror.

4. The term "strike" shall mean an adverse immunity decision based upon bad behavior as set forth by paragraph (c), or a criminal conviction as set forth in paragraph (r).

Where appropriate, the singular shall include the plural, and the plural the singular.

(c) Immunity. Notwithstanding common law or any other provision to the contrary, no immunities shall be extended to any federal judge except as is specifically set forth in this statute. Preserving the purpose of protecting judges from frivolous and harassing actions, no immunity shielding a federal judge shall be construed to extend to any deliberate violation of law, fraud or conspiracy, intentional violation of due process of law, deliberate disregard of material facts, judicial acts without jurisdiction, blocking of a lawful conclusion of a case, or any deliberate violation of the Constitution of these United States, all violations of which shall constitute bad behavior.

(d) Special Federal Grand Jury. There is hereby created within the District of Columbia a twenty-five member Special Federal Grand Jury with full federal geographical jurisdiction having power to judge on both law and fact. Their responsibility shall be limited to determining, on an objective standard, whether a civil suit against a federal judge would be frivolous and harassing, or fall within the exclusions of immunity as set forth herein, and whether there is probable cause of criminal conduct by the federal judge complained of.

(e) Professional Counsel. The Special Federal Grand Jury shall have exclusive power to retain non-governmental advisors, special prosecutors, and investigators, as needed, who shall serve no longer than two years, after which term said officers shall be ineligible. However, with permission of the Special Federal Grand Jury, a special prosecutor may prosecute their current cases through all appeals and any applicable complaints to the Special Federal Grand Jury.

(f) Establishment of a Special Federal Grand Jury Seat. A Special Federal Grand Jury seat is hereby created, which seat shall be located in excess of one mile of any federal judicial body.

(g) Filing Fees. Attorneys representing a client filing a civil complaint or answer before the Special Federal Grand Jury, shall at the time of filing pay a fee equal to the filing fee due in a civil appeal to the United States Supreme Court. Individuals filing a civil complaint or answer before the Special Federal Grand Jury in their own behalf as a matter of right, shall, at the time of filing, post a fee of one hundred dollars, or file a declaration, which shall remain confidential, stating they are impoverished and unable to pay and/or object to such fee.

(h) Annual Funding. Should this statute lack sufficient funding through its filing fees under paragraph (g), and fines imposed under paragraph (q), which amount shall be deposited regularly into the exclusive trust account created by this statute in paragraph (j) for its operational expenses, Congress shall impose appropriate surcharges upon the civil court filing fees of corporate litigants as necessary to make this statute self-supporting, or they may appropriate any and all the necessary funds for the full implementation of this statute by legislation.

(i) Compensation of Jurors. Each Juror shall receive a salary commensurate to fifty percent of a federal district judge prorated according to the number of days actually served.

(j) Annual Budget. The Special Federal Grand Jury shall have an annual operational budget commensurate to twenty times the combined salaries of the twenty-five Jurors serving full time, which sum shall be initially deposited by Congress into an exclusive trust account to be annually administered by the Controller. Should the trust balance, within any budget year, drop to less than an amount equivalent to the annual gross salaries of fifty federal district judges, the Controller shall so notify Congress which shall replenish the account, prorated based on the actual average expenditures during the budget year. Should the trust balance in any subsequent year exceed the annual operational budget at the beginning of a new budget year, the Controller shall return such excess to the United States Treasury.

(k) Jurisdiction. The Special Federal Grand Jury shall have exclusive power to establish rules assuring their attendance, to provide internal discipline, and to remove any of its members on grounds of misconduct. The Special Federal Grand Jury shall immediately assign a docket number to each complaint brought before it. Except as provided in paragraph (r), no complaint of judicial misconduct shall be considered by the Special Federal Grand Jury unless the complainant shall have first attempted to exhaust all judicial remedies available in the federal courts within the immediately preceding six-month period. Such six-month period, however, shall not commence in complaints of prior fraud or blocking of a lawful conclusion until after the date the Special Federal Grand Jury becomes functional. This provision is intended to apply remedially and retroactively.

(l) Qualifications of Jurors. A Juror shall have attained to the age of thirty years, and have been nine years a citizen of the United States, and an inhabitant of Washington, D.C. Those not eligible for Special Federal Grand Jury service shall include elected and appointed officials, members of the Bar, judges (active or retired), judicial, prosecutorial and law enforcement personnel, without other exclusion except previous adjudication of mental incapacity, imprisonment, or parole from a conviction of a felonious crime against persons.

(m) Selection of Jurors. The Jurors shall serve without compulsion and shall be drawn by public lot by the Secretary of State from names on the voters rolls and any citizen submitting his/her name to the Secretary of State for such drawing.

(n) Service of Jurors. Excluding the establishment of the initial Special Federal Grand Jury, each Juror shall serve one year. No Juror shall serve more than once. On the first day of each month, two persons shall be rotated off the Special Federal Grand Jury and new Citizens seated, except in January it shall be three. Vacancies shall be filled on the first of the following month in addition to the Jurors regularly rotated, and the Juror chosen to fill a vacancy shall complete only the remainder of the term of the Juror replaced.

(o) Procedures. The Special Federal Grand Jury shall serve a copy of the filed complaint upon the subject judge and notice to the complainant of such service. The judge shall have thirty days to serve and file an answer. The complainant shall have twenty days to reply to the judge's answer. (Upon timely request, the Special Federal Grand Jury may provide for extensions for good cause.) In criminal matters, the Special Federal Grand Jury shall have power to subpoena witnesses, documents, and other tangible evidence, and to examine witnesses under oath. The Special Federal Grand Jury shall determine the causes properly before it with their reasoned findings in writing within one hundred twenty (120) calendar days, serving on all parties their decision on whether immunity shall be barred as a defense to any civil action that may thereafter be pursued against the federal judge. A rehearing may be requested of the Special Federal Grand Jury within twenty days with service upon the opposition. Twenty days shall be allowed to reply thereto. Thereafter, the Special Federal Grand Jury shall render final determination within thirty days. All allegations of the complaint shall be liberally construed in favor of the complainant. The Jurors shall keep in mind, in making their decisions, that they are entrusted by the people of these United States with the duty of restoring a perception of justice and accountability of the federal judiciary, and are not to be swayed by artful presentation by the federal judge. They shall avoid all influence by judicial and government entities. The statute of limitations on any civil suit brought pursuant to this statute against a federal judge shall not commence until the rendering of a final decision by the Special Federal Grand Jury. Special Federal Grand Jury files shall always remain public record following their final determination. A majority of thirteen shall determine any matter.

(p) Removal. Whenever any federal judge shall have received more than three strikes, the federal judge shall automatically be brought up on charges before Congress for Articles of Impeachment by the Special Federal Grand Jury through its special prosecutor for bad behavior and willful misconduct. Congress thereafter shall commence to a vote on such Articles of Impeachment. Upon a conviction, the federal judge shall be permanently removed from office. He may also be held liable under any other appropriate criminal or civil proceeding.

(q) Indictment. Should the Special Federal Grand Jury also find probable cause of criminal conduct on the part of any federal judge against whom a complaint is docketed, it shall have the power to indict such federal judge except where double jeopardy attaches. The Special Federal Grand Jury shall, without voir dire beyond personal impartiality, relationship, or linguistics, cause to be impaneled special trial jurors, plus alternates, which trial jurors shall be instructed that they have power to judge both law and fact. The Special Federal Grand Jury shall also select a non-governmental special prosecutor and a federal judge with no more than four years on the bench from a state other than that of the defendant judge, (or outside of the District of Columbia, if the case so be). The trial jury shall be selected from the same pool of jury candidates as any regular federal jury. The special prosecutor shall thereafter prosecute the cause to a conclusion, having all the powers of any other prosecutor within these United States. Upon conviction, the special trial jury shall have exclusive power of sentencing (limited to incarceration, fines and/or community service), which shall be derived by an average of the sentences of the trial jurors.

(r) Criminal Procedures. In addition to any other provisions of this statute, a complaint for criminal conduct of a federal judge may be brought directly to the Special Federal Grand Jury upon all the following prerequisites: (1) an affidavit of criminal conduct has been lodged with the appropriate prosecutorial entity within ninety (90) days of the commission of the alleged conduct; (2) the prosecutor declines to prosecute, or one hundred twenty (120) days has passed following the lodging of such affidavit and prosecution has not commenced; (3) an indictment, if sought, has not been specifically declined on the merits by a Grand Jury; and (4) the criminal statute of limitations has not run. Any criminal conviction (including a plea bargain) under any judicial process shall constitute a strike.

(s) Public Indemnification. No federal judge complained of, or sued civilly by a complainant pursuant to this statute shall be defended at public expense or by any elected or appointed public counsel, nor shall any federal judge be reimbursed from public funds for any losses sustained under this statute.

(t) Redress. The provisions of this statute are in addition to other redress that may exist and are not mutually exclusive.

(u) Preeminence. Preeminence shall be given to this statute in any case of conflicts with any other federal statutes, case law, or common law to the contrary. The foreperson of the Special Federal Grand Jury shall read, or cause to be read, this statute to the respective Jurors semi-annually during the first week of business in January and July.

* * *

AUTHORED BY: Ron Branson

P.O. Box 207

North Hollywood, California 91603

J.A.I.L.- Judicial Accountability Initiative Law - www.jail4judges.org
JAIL is a unique addition to our form of gov't. heretofore unrealized.
JAIL is powerful! JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope!
JAIL is taking America like a wildfire! AddRemove@...
JAIL is making inroads into Congress for federal accountability!
E-Groups sign on at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/join
Donate offerings to J.A.I.L., P.O. Box 207, N. Hollywood, CA 91603
"Give me your wealth, and I will give you America" - Ron Branson

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><

#776

From: "jail4judges" <jail4judges@...>
Date: Fri Feb 20, 2004 5:47 am
Subject: When the Courts Don't Work, Neither Do Governments Work

jail4judges@...

J.A.I.L. News Journal
______________________________________________________
Los Angeles, California February 19, 2004

When The Courts Don't Work,

Neither Do Governments Work

Three housing inspectors on leave during investigation

http://www.oregonlive.com/newsflash/regional/index.ssf?/base/ne
ws-4/1076779155273691.xml

Oregon News
The Associated Press
2/14/2004

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) - Three city employees have been placed on paid administrative leave while police investigate allegations that housing inspectors bought or tried to buy houses from owners after running up violations on the homes.

Other city employees are being interviewed, said Commissioner Randy Leonard, who oversees housing.

The City Council approved his request in December to spend as much as $200,000 on an outside investigator. Police and the district attorney's office also confirmed they are investigating.

"The allegations were that the inspectors directly involved in enforcement actions on properties subsequently did purchase, or attempted to purchase, those properties," Leonard said. "The issue here is you target a house, you start having citations put on the house, you have liens put on the house, and you purchase it."

The three employees placed on paid leave are two inspectors and a former housing supervisor.

Nora Mullane, the former supervisor, has been a city employee for nearly 14 years. The housing inspectors, both 10-year veterans, are David Hallberg and Edgar Bolden.

Reached by telephone at home Friday, Mullane, who now works for a different city office, said she could not comment. .... In one case, property records show that in April 1999 Hallberg and Mullane, who are married, purchased a house for $1,300.

Bureau of Development Services records show Hallberg was the primary inspector on a housing code violation case against the property that began in 1996 and on four nuisance violation cases against the property from 1996 to 1999.

At the time of Hallberg and Mullane's purchase, the house had a $1,700 lien against it resulting from the housing enforcement action.

The property was owned by an elderly man who lived in an adult foster care home, and needed assistance from a protective services worker in 1998 to file a request for a financial waiver with the city. The request was denied.

The above was sent to J.A.I.L. by Pamela Gaston, avoice@....

"The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the law of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence." -- John Adams

The above described land fraud is the logical conclusion for all properties throughout this nation when the courts do work. Imagine if you worked for the government, and you could just freely take away anyone's house and property you wanted for basically nothing and make it yours and there was nothing the landowner could do to resist you, what would you do?

This is descript of James 5:4 & 6 on how people will be robbed of their wages, "Behold, the hire of the labourers who have reaped down your fields, which is of you kept back by fraud, crieth: and the cries of them which have reaped are entered into the ears of the Lord .... Ye have condemned and killed the just; and he doth not resist you."

Since all people will be required to utilize the number of the Beast in order to work for a living, people will seek to survive by working off the record. Those hiring them will take advantage of them by law, knowing that the mere reporting of them for not using the number will be their demise.

J.A.I.L., by making judges accountable, will in turn, make governments accountable, and such fraud as is indicated in the article above, will be curbed by being held accountable by the judges.

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><