- ----- Original Message -----From: Terry L. FeslerTo: jail4judgesSent: Saturday, July 22, 2000 4:20 PMSubject: JAILI have been personally involved with many issues beginning in the 60's with draft card burning and the list continues.
Two important things I have learned are:
1) Many excellent projects have failed simply because people fail to see the real benefits of a worthy cause succeeding because they cannot separate their causes and issues from the direction that could be taken as an addition and supplement to their own cause, so they continue to bog down the process of an excellent idea with the infighting, continuing disagreements and fail to see that, in many ways, we are all saying the same thing only with different words and issues: We all want a government that is fair, honest, and just.
2) It may not be always true in every situation, but I have learned that one of the best ways to get what you want is to help others get what they want, first. Once they have what they want/need/had to have, they will then have the free time left over to assist you and appreciate that you once helped them get what they wanted/needed/had to have.
It goes without saying that I view the government of having done this exactly this way, let the people have, light switches, jobs, cars, refrigerators, running water, 12 packs, and many other conveniences and very few will not want anything more and rarely protest. Once this is accomplished the government is free to do what it wants to those who will resist and protest while the majority could not be any more indifferent to what the government does in the name of due process. As long as people believe that convenience is freedom, those of us who demand freedom and justice will have many opponents who have given up their freedoms for conveniences and have no idea that they are one of the causes of the people losing their freedoms, and rights, by default. These people will not complain, or resist, or even think about it until injustice visits them personally. In this view I cannot help but realize that we do have the government we deserve and, in fact, we as a people, have actually earned this type of government.
I view J.A.I.L. as an issue that may possibly get the many other balls rolling that I have worked on and all I have to do is support J.A.I.L. AS IT IS AND IT WILL WORK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Afterwards my other causes will have an easier path of less resistance.
J.A.I.L. is important for many reasons.
1) It is one of the best concepts I have seen anyone present.
2) It will most definitely have a "trickle down" effect that will continue to benefit many other causes and all that has to be done to start this is get J.A.I.L. on the books as the law.
3) Until anyone can come up with a better idea I can see that the sole issue of getting J.A.I.L. on the books can only benefit everyone, and their causes, but J.A.I.L. has to be the on the books first for that door to open and possibly remain open for these other issues.
4) If you personally have another cause [which I also do have many] then it is the utmost importance to realize that J.A.I.L. is yet another tool that has been made available for you to reach these other goals.
My Best Regards to All,
Terry L. Fesler
Dear Lori: I have purposely stayed out of any fray and infighting for good reason. I cannot and will not micro-manage every aspect that comes up among JAILers. But when it comes to the JAIL movement itself, and its focus, I must make that position very clear. JAIL's focus must be LIMITED to JUDICIAL accountability, as the name indicates. It's not called "government accountability." I have explained that I find that our focus must be limited to whomever comes under the umbrella of judicial immunity, and that's not just judges. That umbrella has been expanded to cover anyone remotely connected with the judicial system, including court clerks. The JAIL Initiative starts out "(a) Preamble. We, the People of California (or whatever state adopts JAIL), 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 with these provisions, which shall be known as "The Judicial Accountability Amendment." That preamble describes the parameters of JAIL. It centers on "the doctrine of judicial immunity," the judicial abuse of which requires JAIL. That is the sole purpose of JAIL-- to end the abuse of that doctrine. That necessarily limits JAIL to the judiciary "which shall be known as the JUDICIAL Accountability Amendment." As the author of JAIL, that was my intention when I wrote it, and is still my intention now, and will remain so. It is my contention that the People must first concentrate on judicial abuse, and with that under control, the rest of government will be affected thereby and will bring lawyers, executives, legislators, agents, even corporate execs, into line. To whatever degree they may require additional measures after JAIL is in effect, those measures can then be pursued. But I will not allow the JAIL parameters and mission to be watered down with further expansion. I have expressed my firm belief that anything beyond the stated scope of JAIL serves as a distraction to the objectives of which JAIL is specifically designed to accomplish. I receive emails urging me to expand the scope of JAIL, especially to lawyers and legislators. However, I find that not only unnecessary, but moreover, counter-productive. I realize that, as human beings, we can't all agree with one another 100 percent. There are those that even support JAIL who don't agree with me totally. I have to expect that. But one thing peculiar to me is, I am the one who wrote JAIL based on the purpose I had in mind (and still do). I've had many excellent people who have helped me improve the wording and include all that was necessary to the stated scope and purpose of JAIL, for which I am truly grateful. I couldn't have "perfected" it without them. There are still some details that may have to be adjusted in the future, but the scope of JAIL will not be expanded. The scope of JAIL is pretty well explained in my recent email article "Keeping Focused." Not everyone agrees with my position, and a few have expressed their disagreement, including Jacob Roginsky. Some have even said that "JAIL won't work -- we have to start shooting -- we've already tried everything else." Well, we haven't tried JAIL yet, as there has been nothing like it in prior existence. The system disciplinary agencies for judges don't work, for that reason-- they're part of the system and have a conflict of interest. The Grand Juries we have now aren't allowed to operate with the autonomous power they have, and furthermore, they are limited to the Counties they "serve." We don't have statewide Grand Juries. I am not saying that JAIL can't be part of another effort that is compatible with our objective. All I am saying is, please respect the limited scope and purpose of JAIL as is stated in the Preamble of the Initiative itself. Thanks for all of your help and dedication. God bless.-Ron Branson-