Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoonra
This could be settled if someone could cite a genuine court decision
|
Define your "genuine court" in terms of "genuine Law."
Define "a genuine court decision" in terms of "genuine Law."
Then do the same in terms of lawfully enacted legislation, legislated in Congress assembled, in pursuance of "this Constitution for
the United States of America."
[uncapitalized article denotes that which attaches is
not title)
The "legal" organizations you profit from, and continually apologize for are for-profit criminal racketeering syndicates operating under color of private statutes written by BAR Association at-torn-ees, and propped up by unlawful private municipal mercenary soldiers.
The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Circuit Court of Cook County is a criminal enterprise. U.S. v. Murphy, 768 F.2d 1518, 1531 (7th Cir. 1985).
The United States Supreme Court acknowledged judicial corruption, when it stated that Judge "Maloney was one of many dishonest judges exposed and convicted through 'Operation Greylord', a labyrinthine federal investigation of judicial corruption in Chicago". Bracey v. Gramley, 519 U.S. 1074, 117 S.Ct. 726 (1997).
There has been no finding that the Circuit Court of Cook County is no longer a criminal enterprise, nor that judicial corruption no longer exists in Chicago.
Please "cite a genuine court decision" to the contrary.
Since judges who do not report the criminal activities of other judges become principals in the criminal activity, 18 U.S.C. Section 2, 3 & 4, and since no judges reported the criminal activity of the judges who have been convicted, the other judges are as guilty as the convicted judges.
Please "cite a genuine court decision" to the contrary.
The criminal activities that the Federal Courts found in the Circuit Court of Cook County still exist, and are today under the care, custody and control of Chief Judge Timothy C. Evans.
The Circuit Court of Cook County remains a criminal enterprise.
Please "cite a genuine court decision" to the contrary.
Quote:
I'm gonna wait for someone to provide a citation to such a decision.
|
These criminal syndicates spew forth and "publish"
opinions of men.
The only "decision" made is to spew forth and publish "opinion" in "order" to "court" and then hoodwink the ignorant into acceptance.
I am still waiting for you to start citing any validly legislated and lawfully enacted precursor to any lawful judicial proceeding;
bona fide, not
prima facie, prior to and relative to your "citation" of a man's, or group of men's mere "opinion" as to the relevance of some statutory re-present-a-tion of some alleged Law.
Quote:
"The trial of all crimes except in Cases of impeachment, shall be by Jury..."
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury..."
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury..."
[Does "impartial" mean merely "unbiased" or does it mean complete, and whole?]
"In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved..."
"this Constitution for the United States of America."
|
Please show, precisely, where any single "officer" of any court, (
e.g. BAR Association Accredited Attorney "acting" as "judge," or a even a "genuine" "judge") has been
vested with any
power of
decision specifically pursuant to the Law above.
Quote:
JURY.
1. A body of men selected according to law, for the purpose of deciding some controversy.
2. This mode of trial by jury was adopted soon after the conquest of England, by William, and was fully established for the trial of civil suits in the reign of Henry II. Crabb's C. L. 50, 61.
In the old French law they are called inquests or tourbes of ten men. 2 Loisel's Inst. 238, 246, 248.
3. Juries are either grand juries, (q.v.) or petit juries.
The former having been treated of elsewhere, it will only be necessary to consider the latter.
A petit jury consists of twelve citizens duly qualified to serve on juries, impanelled and sworn to try one or more issues of facts submitted to them, and to give a judgment respecting the same, which is called a verdict.
5. The constitution of the United States directs, that "the trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury;"
and this invaluable institution is also, secured by the several state constitutions.
The constitution of the United States also provides that in suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved. Amendm. VII.
JUDGMENT, practice.
The decision or sentence of the law, given by a court of justice or other competent tribunal, as the result of proceedings instituted therein, for the redress of an injury.
VERDICT, Practice.
The unanimous decision made by a jury and reported to the court on the matters lawfully submitted to them in the course of the trial of a cause.
(emphasis added)
A LAW DICTIONARY
ADAPTED TO THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND OF THE SEVERAL STATES OF THE AMERICAN UNION
by John Bouvier
Revised Sixth Edition, 1856
|
It follows that trials are by Jury, which makes decision of judgement called verdict.
If judgement is "given by a court of justice or other competent tribunal," and that to which is vested power of decision is Jury, then is not Jury itself that "court of justice?"
It is my understanding that in another post you cast aspersion upon relying on definition of terms found in the above cited 19th century scholarly juristic public-a-tion, simply because, as a creature of the 19th century, it was thus rendered unreliable.
Would it not follow, perhaps, that you would likely be wont to apply the same line of reasoning to the terms of Law found in an 18th century public-a-tion?
