Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

* * Sky Diving Without a Parachute * *

Expand Messages
  • jail4judges
    J.A.I.L. News Journal _____________________________________________________ Los Angeles, California August 15, 2002
    Message 1 of 1 , Aug 15, 2002
      J.A.I.L. News Journal
      Los Angeles, California                                          August 15, 2002

      HotSeat4Judges/M-Th/5pmPT   TheJAILerMakers   What?MeWarden?
                      FedJAIL4FedJudges                   E-mail&hosting

      Sky Diving Without A Parachute
      by Scott Huminski, Vermont JAILer
      Comment by Ron Branson follows
      Being from Vermont, many persons believe that judges and most government officials have not taken/filed oaths properly. This may be a very true contention. As such, many would say that the government and judiciary in Vermont is illegitimate and should be overthrown. This is a very hard pill to swallow for the average grass roots voter and may tend to alienate many that would otherwise support JAIL. JAIL needs grass roots support, which it can get by simply arguing that judges should obey the law and Constitution; and if they don't, they will get punished like any other lawbreaker.
      JAIL will have no direct affect upon forcing government officials to
      properly take their oath. JAIL will make it mandatory for a judge to vacate
      any prior ruling made by a judge without oath/authority, thus, indirectly
      forcing judges to straighten out their oaths. Would you rather have every
      judge and official take their oaths, file them properly and then continue to ignore the facts, law and Constitution in the cases before them?
      If oaths became the prime focus of JAIL, JAIL could easily be defeated by such a maneuver, and these now properly oathed jurists could continue with their misdeeds. The oath issue is a symptom arising out of the disease of a lack of judicial accountability. If we focus on symptoms, the disease will remain and thrive.
      I have seen the results of valid non-frivolous oath litigation here in Vermont. Without JAIL, such cases have been, and will always be, dismissed with a smug erroneous ruling by the judge shielded by absolute immunity.
      Compliance with oaths without JAIL would take away a very strong tactic for those of us who may face future misconduct by judges. All of us who, in the past, have been subjected to an illegal ruling of a judge can attack those rulings based on the oath argument, as any acts taken by a non-judge are void and legal nullities. Pushing for oath compliance without JAIL will take away this one avenue of recourse for those who continue to be damaged by illegal judicial conduct.
      Many are waiting for JAIL to pass to attack past judgments and rulings as void for want of subject matter jurisdiction and authority. Featuring or attacking the oath issue without JAIL is analogous to sky diving without a parachute.
      JAIL is the tool needed to solve a myriad of causes, problems and injustices. As such, a JAIL supporter may find himself shoulder to shoulder with someone that he vehemently disagrees with on certain issues, which is why JAIL should remain true to its one goal -- Judicial Accountability. Once JAIL is passed, then take that tool and use it to fix whatever issues you desire (i.e., Oaths, First Amendment, Second Amendment, etc.,)
      -Scott Huminski-
      Vermont JAILer

      Comment by Ron Branson:
      Thanks to Scott Huminski for writing the above magnificent piece based upon his very wise discernment. Perhaps unknown to some, it has been said that I am trying to suppress open discussion regarding the requirement for judicial oaths. Far be it!  J.A.I.L. does encourage open discussions without personal invective. This said, J.A.I.L. is not about to divert its focus from judicial accountability to judicial "oaths."
      As Scott Huminski has so artfully stated, we must keep the focus on the cure and not the symptom. If we have judicial accountability, the oath of office issue will be cured very rapidly.
      Now I would like to address Scott Huminski's statement, "Compliance with oaths without J.A.I.L. would take away a very strong tactic for those of us who may face future misconduct by judges."
      It is most unfortunate that J.A.I.L. could not be simultaneously passed throughout all fifty states. While Scott has rightfully called attention to the retrospect of J.A.I.L. as it applies to particular victims of the judiciary, I would like to point out the criminal implications.
      Is it not true that it is a criminal act to impersonate a government official, and particularly a judge?  And would it not also follow that a "judge" who has not taken the oath required under Article VI, section 2 of the U.S. Constitution and/or each state's Constitution, is not a judge, but an impostor? The answer to both of these questions is a resounding "Yes!"
      Having thus said, upon J.A.I.L.'s passage into law, every judicial impostor is immediately ripe for J.A.I.L.'s criminal sanctions as set forth in ΒΆ(s): "Criminal Procedures. In addition to any other provisions of this Amendment, a complaint for criminal conduct of a judge may be brought directly to the Special 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 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."
      I would therefore recommend, in the leading states to pass J.A.I.L., that the JAILers, or whoever, rush to their friendly prosecutor en masse and lodge the appropriate criminal affidavit supportive for the issuance of a warrant for the arrest of their favorite judicial impostor. Will their friendly prosecutor act upon these criminal affidavits? Probably not, but with J.A.I.L. in place, who cares?  As I said above, it's just too bad that J.A.I.L. would not be passed simultaneously throughout America.
      -Ronald Branson-
      Judicial Accountability Initiative Law (J.A.I.L.)

      J.A.I.L. is an acronym for Judicial Accountability Initiative Law
      JAIL's very informative website is found at www.jail4judges.org
      JAIL proposes a unique new addition to our form of government.
      JAIL is powerful! JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope!
      JAIL is spreading across America like a fast moving wildfire!
      JAIL is making inroads into Congress for federal accountability!
      JAIL may be supported at P.O. Box 207, N. Hollywood, CA 91603
      To subscribe or be removed:  add-remove-jail@...
      E-Groups may sign on at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/join
      Open forum to make your voice heard JAIL-SoundOff@egroups.com
      Ask not what J.A.I.L. can do for me, but ask what I can do for 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    <><
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.