Why does the State intervene on Criminal Matters?

[indio007]

Something that has been a splinter in my mind?
When JQ Citizen files a criminal complaint with either the police or at the courts the STATE takes over the case.
I can't figure out why the de facto STATE would intervene and attempt to take a statutory pound of flesh for itself.
This is the standard operating procedure in MASSACHUSETTS for instance.
If a resident files a
criminal complaint , effectively the complainant can not withdraw it. The State takes over completely and will not withdraw even on the complainants express request.

By what claim of right or authority does the STATE execute this under? Is this not a subrogation of right?

If it's not, what document is the waiver? The police report?

My assumption is that the STATE is protecting it's own interests by exercising a property right in the legal fiction complainant and is in fact subrogating nothing.


If I want to prosecute for a crime , why can't a do it directly? Why do I need the DA?
Can an individual allege. criminally prosecute, and convict in his own right if the facts support it?

Why is the STATE reaping financial reward in the stead of the alleged victim?
Why does the an alleged victim need to recover damages civilly in his/her own right autonomous of the STATE?
Where is the DA then......?


One reasonable conclusion would be the action of making a police report and/or complaint only serves to protect the public/State interest and not the interest of the alleged victim.

In effect the police report is a damage report on STATE property interests. The property (alleged victim) must find it's own remedy.

[psholtz]

I've long wondered about this too.. even long before I started "waking up" to other things.

I don't know the answer..

[Jerry Pitts]

First: Should you voluntarily take an incident into one of the existing courts (you become the plaintiff), there is a presumption automatically made, that you are a 14th amendment citizen (unless there is evidence to the contrary); As a US Citizen, you are also construed to be an 'employee' of the Federal government, occupying an office of Resident/Resident Alien/Citizen, etc.

Second: Because these courts operate in an 'administrative' capacity, there are particular administrative procedures that must be adhered to. Those procedures would be inclusive of filing the proper 'procedural forms' that are mandated by administrative procedure, and that are available upon request. Failure to adhere to those administrative procedures, will result in either an inaction on the part of the agency; a dismissal of action by the agency; or a moving forward on the request.

Attached is the proper form to use to initiate an action, before it reaches the administrative level wherein it is ripe for judicial action.

The intricacies involved in filing such form are explained from other sources also available upon request from the agency wherein this initiating document is found.

Attachment is inadvertently added to the next post. My apologies.

Jerry Carlos
Ambassador of Jesus, the Christ.

[Jerry Pitts]

Here is the attachment. Again, my apologies.

Jerry Carlos
Ambassador of Jesus, the Christ.

[netwrkranger]

From George Gordon:

There are 2 forms of law on the planet: Common Law and Civil Law. All forms of law are subforms of these two forms of law.

The Constitution has only 3 jurisdictions of law: common law, equity, and admiralty.

There are 2 forms of action: civil and criminal.

Common law and admiralty have civil and criminal forms of action.

Equity has ONLY civil forms of action.

This means that Common Law and Admiralty both have cognizance over civil and criminal actions, but Equity only has cognizance over civil actions.

Any criminal forms of action must be adjudicated in either Common Law or Admiralty.

No admiralty courts in the land has any jurisdiction to hear common law issues, but Common law courts can hear admiralty issues and must proceed using the procedures of the Civil Law.

[Jerry Pitts]

Duplicate post. Again, my apologies.

Jerry Carlos
Ambassador of Jesus, the Christ.

[Jerry Pitts]

Originally Posted by Right to the Castle

Police power. Jame B Woods discusses this in his books. Not recommended for much else.

" Police power " is immediately governed by 'administrative procedures' which in turn are governed by state level codes, rules, and regulations, all of which are then governed by the Fed level of the same format.

Bottom line.. because you or others are 'playing in their sandbox', then you are required by their sandbox rules to adhere to the necessary and proper administrative rules which say who, when, where, how (etc.,) various events can take place within the sandbox.

Jerry Carlos
Ambassador of Jesus, the Christ.

[indio007]

Police= Policy
The policy within the de facto state corporate organization. I guess they take over everything.

It's okay. Big Brother is there to take care of all our problems and complaints. Unless one of those complaints is against Big Brother of course.

[Jerry Pitts]

Originally Posted by Right to the Castle

Wrong. Police powers were originally found in the people. The state's police powers were created by the US Supreme Court

We are faced, in the current situation, with a now non-existing right of the people (according to the ptb's), the right of self policing (self governing). Every time a truth is brought up, someone will attempt to push it off to the side, by bringing up 'what should be' happening, but is not happening. As I stated before, we do not live in that "IDEAL" scenario where the rights of the people are given their due respect and dignity. Smell the flavor of REALITY as it is today.

You say that I am "Wrong". Yet you point out what 'was' and what 'is now'. The reality is what "is now", and what is now is NOT what was "originally founded in the people".


Jerry Carlos
Ambassador of Jesus, the Christ.

[ThomPaine]

Originally Posted by netwrkranger

From George Gordon:

There are 2 forms of law on the planet: Common Law and Civil Law. All forms of law are subforms of these two forms of law.

The Constitution has only 3 jurisdictions of law: common law, equity, and admiralty.

There are 2 forms of action: civil and criminal.

Common law and admiralty have civil and criminal forms of action.

Equity has ONLY civil forms of action.

This means that Common Law and Admiralty both have cognizance over civil and criminal actions, but Equity only has cognizance over civil actions.

Any criminal forms of action must be adjudicated in either Common Law or Admiralty.

No admiralty courts in the land has any jurisdiction to hear common law issues, but Common law courts can hear admiralty issues and must proceed using the procedures of the Civil Law.

Great post and very true (AFAIK) the only thing I would add is that equity and admiralty merged in 1938 and with the exception of a Military Tribunal or Court Martial, I cannot think of an example (I am sure someone will come up with one) where they (Eq/Adm) would be separate.

Everything is about commerce, damages (piracy, collision at sea, theft in a foreign port), taxes (excise, import, export, fees, tarriffs, etc) and the like and these all go hand in hand with each other, merrily down the lane..

Thom