On Inaccessible Grand Juries, II
- On Inaccessible Grand Juries, IIBy Ron Branson
Within the County of Los Angeles, and throughout California, a County Grand Jury is made up of 23 People. Besides acquiring 23 People to institute our own Grand Jury, here are the realities that we also must face. Currently, the Superior Court Judges get to select 23 People from a larger pool o People who can serve for the following year. When that is accomplished, then the District Attorney takes over. He gives them a brainwashing, called "Grand Jury Orentation," explaining to them what their job is.
During that session, the Grand Jurors are indoctrinated that they work for the District Attorney's Office. The D.A.'s Office appoints one of their most impressive prosecutors to be the Grand Jury Counselor. He is usually a very sharp hansom young attorney. The reason for this is that most of those selected from the pool by the judges to serve on the Grand Jury are mostly grandmas who have a grandson about his age.
As a practical matter, this Grand Jury Counselor is to charm all these grandmas with his demeanor as an ideal young looking male figure. This information I received from John Sunnyborne, the past foreman of the Los Angeles County Grand Jury. I should inform you that my wife was the head secretary within the Santa Monica District Attorney's Office of the County of Los Angeles, and it was through this connection I gained inside access to the County Grand Jury and to its foreman.
With this D.A. sitting there in the County Grand Jury advising the Grand Jurors, a big conflict is created, as the whole purpose constitutionally of the Grand Jury is to be a check against the District Attorney, for it is the People's shield against a tyrannical and arbitrary government.
It is also a conflict of interest in the another purpose of the Grand Jury is to be the People's sword to go after corrupt government officials. The Grand Jurors may constitutionally investigate all judges, county Counsel, the Sheriff, the police and its chief, every member of the County Board of Supervisors, and the District Attorney. Yes, they have the power to hand down an indictment against the District Attorney himself. The Grand Jurors are the People themselves, and they have autonomous power to investigate and indict anyone who, in their judgment, should be indicted and held for trial for corrupt acts.
What JAIL4Judges seeks to do is make these powers openly recognized by all. However, there is one power we currently do not have, and has been added within the J.A.I.L. Amendment. This doctrine should have been incorporated within the Constitution by our Founding Fathers, and that is a Grand Jury Special Prosecutor who is in no way connected with the government or with the prosecution.
As it is now, even if there is a County Grand Jury indictment, it is the District Attorney who has the last word in the exercise of his discretion on whether to prosecute.
So what if the Grand Jury indicted the District Attorney himself? Obviously, the District Attorney's Office would not prosecute their own. Such indictment would be placed into the hands of the State Attorney General. But he is more than likely a friend of the District Attorney, and arouse out of the Office of the District Attorney.
Now remember, I speak from inside knowledge having known those both within the D.A.'s Office and within the State Attorney General's Office. These men are on a first name acquaintance bases, and know one another's wives and their children, attend the same Office and Christmas Parties, etc. I know, as I have been there on the inside myself and was able to cavort with them. The supposed separation is only on paper, not in reality, so they do not "investigate" one another.
You have suggested that since we are the People, and the masters of our own destiny, and these public servants only work for us, why should we have to jump through hoops with the Initiative Process to institute the principles of JAIL4Judges.
Yes, I agree that we do have that right, but just try to enforce a non-existent Initiative that has not been submitted to the People based upon the argument that we are the People, and we do not need to follow the prescribed constitutional processes set forth for us to follow in instituting judicial accountability. Yes, we can stand up and say, but I am willing to die from my country and for my children's future. Okay, while you may very well end up dead, we will still end up with no judicial accountability. We do well to heed God's Word, "For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God." James 1:20. I do understand the natural emotions of the wrath of man, but is our wrath, i.e., "We are made as hell, and we are not going to take it any more," an excuse for refusing to follow the due process specifically set forth in the Constitution?
It is just too bad our Founding Fathers did not see the light set forth in JAIL4Judges in the wording of our current Constitution. It was not a willful act, it is just that they were enlighten by Almighty God on this. But we are enlighten. We know that it is a very important measure that must be within every Constitution. So let us not fumble the ball in the Ninth.
There was a poem I learned in driving school when I was sixteen. It went like this. "Here lies the body of Julian Grey, who died while taking the right of way. He was right, dead right as he moved along. But now he is just as dead as if he had been wrong."
* * *Phil Freeman wrote:
Well Ron my intention is not to be violent until that time, GOD forbid, comes. I'm not afraid of jail, I am afraid of future generations losing all liberty. For me freedom and liberty are worth more than my life and without them my life is forfeit and moot. HE who dares wins, I dare Ron. How will I look into the eyes of my children and grand children when they ask me ," What happened grandfather?" What did you do to try to stop this?" I will stand to answer and not be ashamed sir. We must educate the incompetent, the ignorant, and abandon the foolish, the weak, lame and lazy for those fearless, mentally mobile and willing. When we examine the occupy movement we can envision the same volume of outreach in restoring the grand jury/ SPGJs me thinks. So what do we need Ron? Like 25 member panels with 4 alternates and a foreperson in each county? Seems totally doable to me. I love my country and hate the corporation/govt..I'm open to suggestions but I must do something Ron. As a side note, I wasn't looking for a vote from the People, only that they do their duty...Phillip
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 1:08 AM, Ron Branson <VictoryUSA@...> wrote:
While this is correct, it will be perceived as a violent take-over because the majority of the People will not act with you on this. So you are proposing an act which the People will not support. This will be said to be a terrorist activity, and you will be hauled off to jail, while the People will view you as an anarchist. Sure, we have the rights, but try to enforce it without it being voted upon by the People, and see where it gets you.
I too have seen the establishment of Common Law Grand Juries who determined to indict public officials here in Los Angeles. But they are no longer, and you know the reason why.
Phil Freeman wrote:
Ron it appears on its face that to me we do not need a constitutional amendment to enact anything. we do not need any legislature to do it either. We are the sovereigns and while we transfer some of our authority to servants of government We retain all power to self govern. We need to simply run an ad in some major papers and convene these SGJs to assemble and begin reviewing complaints. I worked with Bill Duff for many months on this very thing. At issue is people are not versed in law and haven't been since about 1853 with the advent of mandatory public schooling wherein civics was replaced with social studies...Phillip
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Ron Branson <VictoryUSA@...> wrote:On Inaccessible Grand JuriesBy Kirk Schwoebel
... Attempting to get people to do anything, unless they're directly, and, adversely effected, is a depressing, thankless, grueling exercise in pounding ones head against a solid object, repeatedly.
We, theoretically, have Grand Juries, why do we have to be "allowed" access to them? Or, have to ask "permission" to submit evidence, or initiate an investigation? Are these the "peoples" Grand Juries? Or, the Government's? I don't have to ask permission to use my own bathroom, why do I need permission to report a crime to someone who can deal with it?
Calling the police on a judge who's clearly on a criminal rampage doesn't get the expected results. In fact the result can be rather negative.
The court system is so dysfunctional right now, unless jail4judges is enacted immediately, it too will be disregarded as a "formality," just as the law in general is ignored, bypassed, modified, misapplied, distorted, and contorted presently.
I've been a supporter of jail4judges for awhile, if not monetarily, morally, and spiritually, due to employment, or the lack of, for the past two and a half years. But, dang it Ron, this has to be the best thing that could happen to this country if the masses would only realize it.
I'm afraid that ship has sailed. If you could just get on American Idol and subliminally somehow put jail4judges out there before a captive audience, while doing a Michael Jackson number (that'll get you a call back) or something?
If you need any help campaigning, I'd love to help out anyway I could, mailing lists or whatnot, just put out the word. Thanks for your time, and your efforts in this noble quest.
* * *
Kirk Schwoebel is correct, the only way to recover our country and our freedoms is through the Grand Juries. However, the People have been just too ignorant to recognize what they have allowed. In reality, the Grand Juries are us from beginning to the end, and has not a thing to do with government, except the giving of our permission to lodge a complaint. Then it is we, the People, that assesses we will allow our public servants access to proceed with a prosecution.
Absolutely every felony is required constitutionally to gain our permission whether we will allow access to prosecution. "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury..." Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
What has happened is, we have allowed ourselves to be deceive by a play on words. Therefore, many "crimes" which do not even have a victim, nor are even crimes, are being classed by government as felonies, such as failing to report our assets when transporting our own money outside of the country, or exercising our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. While these are crimes, we are allowing then to prosecute us for innocent activities.
Now notice, the Constitution does not say regarding felonies, "No person can be convicted," but rather. "No person shall be held to answer." Until we the People determine Probable Cause, not a one of us may be held to answer (enter a plea) for such accusations by government.
Do you recognize what would happen if we, the People, enforced this constitutional provision? Our prison population would be greatly reduced, and we could close down several prisons, followed by a lower tax support, followed by more spendable reserves for ourselves, followed by more production and more jobs. Instead, we merely joke about prosecutors being able to indict a ham sandwich through the government's Grand Juries. As Mr. Schwoebel says, "Are these the "peoples" Grand Juries? Or, the Government's?"
Then we have our servants playing with the meaning of words for the purpose of distortion. Prosecutors are bringing prosecutions in the name of their own "Presentments," and not getting an indictment of the Grand Jury at all.
Then there is out and out fraud performed in the name of Grand Juries. For instance, it has even been brought to my attention that some prosecutors have kept within their desk drawer a rubber stand signature of the Foreperson of the Grand Jury to be able to obtain an "Indictment" by just sliding open their desk drawer and pulling out that rubber stamp and hitting the rubber stamped signature on the supposed indictment.
One thing I am seeing in my exposures drawing attention to the Grand Juries, is that I am seeing more responses acknowledging the need for Grand Juries. Perhaps I am being used to change People' perspective that Grand Juries do not belong to the government, but rather are US. Perhaps we the People should start a department store chain call, "GRAND JURIES R US just to publically get the point across. We are the Grand Juries! We are the first, and we are the last! We are the beginning, and we are the end when it comes to governments, for it is self-evident truth that establishes that we are endowed by our Creator with such unalienable rights, for God has ordained it so. We cannot appeal to any higher Authority! God is first, then us, and WE ARE THE GRAND JURY! No man can come to felony prosecution except by US.
This is precisely why we must install JAIL4Judges within all governments. The JAIL4Judges Initiative creates a Special Independent People's Grand Jury of US. Access to this Special Grand Jury of US in through the regular Grand Juries. A Fourth Amendment is brought by US directed to the prosecutor. The prosecutor has only 120 days to present the complaint of criminal conduct to a regular County Grand Jury for indictment and begin his prosecution of the judge complained of, or else the matter may be presented to this Special Grand Jury, ie., US, for an indictment and prosecution. This provision is set forth in Paragraph 17 of the Initiative, to wit;
17. Criminal Procedures. In addition to any other provisions of this Amendment, a complaint for criminal conduct against a judge may be brought directly to the Special Grand Jury, when all of the following conditions have been met: (1) an affidavit or declaration of criminal conduct has been lodged with the appropriate prosecutorial entity within ninety days of the commission of the alleged crime; (2) the prosecutor declines to prosecute, or one hundred twenty days have passed following the lodging of such affidavit or declaration, and prosecution has not commenced; (3) an indictment, if sought, has not been specifically declined on the merits by a county 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.
JAIL4Judges provides for three strikes and you are out! Government has their three strikes and you are out for us, so we believe we should have a three strikes and you are out for all judges. This is provision is found in paragraph 18, to wit; 18. Removal. Whenever any judge has received three strikes, the judge shall be permanently removed from office, and thereafter shall not serve in any State judicial office. That's right, we mandate they vacate their office with their tails between their legs, giving up 50% of all the judicial retirement funds. This will save us untold amount of tax dollars. Also, through JAIL4Judges the People ultimately will be allowed to run for the bench themselves, which is foreclosed presently to all but exclusive Bar Members of the Association.
So, I ask one more time, when are we going to wake up to the fact that WE ARE THE GRAND JURY?