• About
  • Blog (Ext.)
  • Books
  • Contact
  • Education Resources
  • News Links

PERRIN LOVETT

~ Deo Vindice

PERRIN LOVETT

Tag Archives: injustice

Alex Jones and “The Law”

11 Friday Nov 2022

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes

≈ Comments Off on Alex Jones and “The Law”

Tags

ALex Jones, injustice

Think whatever one will of Jones, he is being lynched by the US justice system, which is the last place one should ever look for justice. Billions and Trillion$ in potential “damages.” This operation has nothing to do with justice for parents, students, or anyone else. Rather, it’s about silencing a thorny voice against the machine. For perspective, the total amount being sought from Jones, for expressing his opinions about a newsworthy event, is on par with the ridiculous figure Poland is seeking (way too late) from Germany for all the damages inflicted from 1939 – 1945. Go figure.

Faites Attention!

01 Thursday Oct 2020

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns

≈ Comments Off on Faites Attention!

Tags

(((leur))), France, Hervé Ryssen, injustice, liberté, Réveillez-vous!

La France est attaquée. Vous êtes envahi par des sauvages et des voleurs incompatibles. A cause d’un canular, les prisons sont vidées. Pourtant, il y a de la place pour un écrivain qui a osé identifier (((les personnes))) qui ont contribué à détruire la République.

Libérez Hervé Ryssen! Libérez-vous!

Un scandale. (En Anglais)

 

Dropping the Pretense

19 Tuesday Nov 2019

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns

≈ Comments Off on Dropping the Pretense

Tags

crime, England, injustice, Julian Assange, torture

I suppose it’s no longer needed with the Empire’s fake espionage charges looming and Assange being tortured to death in jail.

Prosecutors in Sweden dropped the preliminary investigation due to a lack of evidence.

An additional interview with the 48-year-old “wouldn’t significantly change the balance of evidence,” the authorities said today.

The probe was reopened in the summer but it was ruled Assange couldn’t be extradited to Sweden from the UK.

Assange has always denied the allegation.

Back in June, the UK Home Secretary signed an order allowing Assange to be extradited to the US.

Maybe the US could kindly drop its charges based on lack of evidence and a lack of jurisdiction, lack of malum in se, etc. Railroad Jullian, ride shotgun for Andrew. Nice. Way to go, GB!

Paul Craig Roberts on the Assange “Case”

14 Sunday Jan 2018

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

America, injustice, Julian Assange, murder, Paul Craig Roberts, tyranny

Please read THIS, should you care and in between divisional games, of course. Excellent review of the non-case.

In the US and probably throughout Europe, politicians and feminists, with the exception of Katrin Axelsson and Lisa Longstaff, used the presstitute media to paint Assange as a rapist and as a spy. The feminists cared nothing about any truth; they just wanted a man to demonize. Truth was the last thing on politicians’ minds. They just wanted to divert attention from Washington’s crimes and betrayals of allies by portraying Assange as a threat and traitor to America. They were unconcerned that Assange could not be a traitor to America as he is not an American citizen. In actual fact, there is no basis in law for any US claim against Assange. Yet because of Washington and its servile British puppet state, Assange remains interred in the Embassy of Ecuador in London. Clearly, honor and respect for law reside in Ecuador, not in the US, UK, or Sweden.

But facts, along with law and civil liberty, have ceased to mean anything in the Western world. The corrupt US Attorney General Jeff Sessions said that the arrest of Assange is a “priority.” The British police, mere lackeys of Washington, said that they would still arrest Assange, despite the case being dropped, if he left the embassy.

For the British, serving Washington is a higher calling than the honor of their country.

The interesting fact is not that Assange has committed no crime (anywhere) but is held nonetheless hostage by real criminals; the crazy thing here is how little the people know or care. And, sadly, none of this is surprising.

Happy Sunday!

She Gets Half – If You’re Lucky: Bill Sardi on the “Divorce Trap”

14 Friday Jul 2017

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns

≈ Comments Off on She Gets Half – If You’re Lucky: Bill Sardi on the “Divorce Trap”

Tags

America, anti-family law, crime, divorce, injustice, law, men

Mainly for men. There’s a whole lot of truth in this one:

If you are the primary wage earner in the middle of a divorce, you are likely the victim of a hidden trap that you may never become aware of even when the divorce is finally over.

…

The process of modern divorce is a crime. It is an exercise in wealth transfer. But who will put a stop to it? Divorce today is not fair, but it is legal. Somebody told me in divorce nobody in the courtroom believes anybody is telling the truth, certainly not the attorneys and sometimes not even the judge. Be forewarned.

Much of this comes from a layman’s perspective, which is a good thing, here. I knew this was Cali-based before it was stated (“pro per” and community property, etc.). However, the experience, especially for men, is nearly universal across the country. Please pay attention to everything he warns about if you are: 1) getting a divorce; 2) unhappily married, or 3) thinking about getting married.

A few facts:

Women initiate most divorces;

Divorce is more common than cancer;

Women “win” in divorce cases at least 75% of the time despite usually being at least 50% of the problem(s);

Women, according to every study conducted in the U.S., Canada, and Europe, are the majority of domestic violence aggressors (despite the facts that women grossly over-report and that men grossly under-report);

This system is rigged, it was designed to be rigged;

Domestic courts are a sham in America;

Courts are a sham in America;

The law is a sham in America;

No one seems to care, at all, about any of this.

Do take heart that, eventually (and that may be a loooong time), the offending party will self-destruct. However, like a truck bomb, this usually takes out half the neighborhood.

A note: the “private judges” Sardi writes about are usually known as mediators or arbitrators. Do beware of them along with Guardians, friends of the court, and other expensive meddlers. Also know that they are frequently mandated the courts. This, while not binding, can be expensive. It can also be a useful trial-run for determining how much of a case you and the other side may have (not that often matters in a rigged system) – make of it what you will, if you have to do it.

Again, consider Sardi’s advice. I have three additional points which go a long way towards preventing any of these headaches, heart attacks, robberies, and jail terms from ever happening to any man. They are as depressing as the are effective. Accordingly, I withhold them…

It’s a Trap!

LaJ9Kmo.gif

Lucas/20th Cent. Fox/Disney?

For more Withholding of the Depressive … Join Perrin on Patreon.

No Justice, No Peace: Paul Craig Roberts on the Systemic Corruption and Evil of the American Criminal Legal Racket

25 Sunday Jun 2017

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns

≈ Comments Off on No Justice, No Peace: Paul Craig Roberts on the Systemic Corruption and Evil of the American Criminal Legal Racket

Tags

civil liberties, corruption, criminal justice, freedom, injustice, law, Paul Craig Roberts

I would say Roberts is tied with Pat Buchanan for first place as America’s pre-eminent political/societal opinion writer. Years of genuine public service, education, and superior intelligence have left him in a unique position from which to observe the goings on of the declining USA. More importantly, he calls it like he sees it, like it is.

An economist extraordinaire, the legal system is one of his pet subjects. Particularly, he focuses on the criminal “justice” industry and in especial, on the inherent unfairness and injustice of American criminal law. He did so again recently: a masterful column:

The fact of the matter is that only 3% of felony cases go to trial, and in these cases prosecutors are able to bribe and to pay witnesses for false testimony against the accused and to withhold exculpatory evidence that would clear the defendant of the charges. In other words, conviction regardless of the evidence is almost always obtained.

In the other 97% of the cases, the defendant’s attorney negotiates with the prosecutor a fictitious charge to which the accused will plead guilty in exchange for dropping the more serious charge for which the accused was arrested. The attorney knows that to defend against even a false charge is unlikely to be successful and that the accused will draw a longer sentence from going to trial than from agreeing to a lesser charge in a plea bargain. Both prosecutor and judge are grateful, because it saves both from days, even weeks, of court time, thus keeping the judge’s case load lighter and permitting the prosecutor many more convictions with which to embellish his record. A week of plea bargains can produce many times the convictions of a week in court dealing with one case. The fewer cases the judge has to study and to apply his understanding of the law, the better for the judge.

As only 3% of cases go to trial, the police evidence is seldom tested. The police know this. One result is that it is much easier for the police to pickup someone who had committed a similar crime in the past and charge him, than to go to the trouble of solving the crime by investigating it. Indeed, the police are so out of touch with neighborhoods, compared to bygone days when police walked their beats and knew the population, and crimes appear so random, that many crimes simply can’t be investigated. Much easier to pick up someone with a record and charge them. This practice explains the high recidivism rates. Once convicted, they will convict you again. It is how crimes are “solved.”

Don Siegelman was probably the best governor Alabama ever had. He had to be good in order to be elected as a Democrat in a Republican state. The fact that President Obama, who had the support of 113 state attorneys general in behalf of Siegelman, did not lift a finger to have the Justice Department look into Siegelman’s frameup or use his pen to sign a pardon demonstrates that an ordinary citizen has no chance whatsoever. When a prominent governor can be framed, the fate of a single mom or a black man is sealed when they are arrested.

In the “American criminal justice system” justice is totally absent. There is no such thing as justice in America.

The nail, hit squarely and hard on the head.

There exists in this country, among the semi-literate masses, a lay juridical theory best summarized as: “The police wouldn’t arrest an innocent man.” They would. They do. They usually – 97% might be a little light – get away with it. Innocent people go to prison or pay fines for nothing. The masses celebrate their self-righteous ignorance and watch sports on TV. Case closed.

The great shame of the system, if the corruption and evil don’t count for it, is that this fabricated approach destroys the legitimacy of actual prosecution of real criminals. How can a system that railroads 97% of the participants as victims possibly be counted on to properly handle the other 3% of certain scofflaws? It can’t. If anything, the same laws are seemingly set up to allow the really guilty and the really harmful to go free. Some of them help make these debased laws. A rigged system of double standards.

nimbus-image-1498398624980

Funny Junk. And not very funny…

Part of the problem is selective prosecution, persecution based on controlling behaviors (otherwise harmful to no one). American “justice” is a matter of towing the line, luck, access, connections, and money. For those accused of minor crimes, and to a lesser degree felonies, there is a narrow window for beating or buying justice. This requires a level of skill or luck far beyond that of the ordinary citizen. I’ve seen it in action in: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and the Federal system. It’s real and it’s universal. It represents failure of jurisprudence and of civilization.

Based on my professional observations, I can vouch for Roberts’s assertions 100%. He investigates these matters nationwide with an honest, critical, and unbiased eye. I’ve corresponded with him on the problems as have numerous attorneys, victims (defendants), reporters, legislators, etc.

The next time you hear about someone accused of committing some crime, any crime, consider these questions:

1) did the person break any written law?;

2) did the person intend to break a law?;

3) did the person really do some act in contradiction of the law(s); and,

4) was there any actual problem or harm associated with the actions that amounted to the alleged law breaking?

The answer (to one or all) is very likely “no.”

Then consider that:

The subject law(s), if any, is likely invalid;

The law(s) has been misapplied;

There was no discernible victim;

There is no evidence whatsoever;

The prosecution’s case is probably constructed entirely of lies;

There is no equal application of the law(s);

There is no due process in the procedures of adjudication;

There will be no trial;

There will be no review by a jury of peers;

No defenses, however complete, will be accepted; and

Most people do not give a damn about any of this.

This is the American “justice” system. There is no justice in it at all.

Now consider that someday (if you haven’t already) you may be on the receiving end of this rank evil.

How’s your team doing?

The Bundy Trial: A Verdict On American Justice

07 Monday Nov 2016

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns

≈ Comments Off on The Bundy Trial: A Verdict On American Justice

Tags

America, Constitution, Courts, crime, Federal government, Georgia, injustice, jury, justice, law, nullification, Oregon

Two Thursdays ago, while I prepared to hit the road, a federal jury did an amazing thing. Herein I answer a reader request for commentary.

Ammon Bundy, Ryan Bundy, Shawna Cox, Jeff Banta, Kenneth Medenbach, David Lee Fry and Neil Wampler were charged and tried for “taking over” a remote federal facility in Oregon. On October 26th a jury found all defendant’s not guilty on all counts. Well, Ammon Bundy still faces a count of tampering for disabling a few cameras. But the long-term sentence charges were dismissed unanimously by the jury.

While the case and verdict is seen by some who seek limited government as a success, it really is just another example (although with a happy ending) of what is wrong with the justice system [SIC]. My summary of these proceedings is that they represent a fluke of judicial process and little more.

First, I find it a little funny that just about everyone on the right (to include many limited government advocates) pulled for the DOJ/FBI last week during the odd continuation of the Hillary email/corruption/pedo-pizza carnival of doom. It was the exact same outfit that prosecuted the Bundys. Now that Comey has once again closed the Clintongate files it is clear to anyone of room temperature IQ or higher that justice in America really isn’t. Unless there’s a slip and a fluke.

I have recounted before how the justice system [SIC] in general, and the federal system in particular, work. 99% of federal defendants are railroaded into court for crimes not set forth in the Constitution. Of those, around 97% enter into some kind of plea agreement. Of those remaining who demand and receive a trial, maybe 90% are convicted. So, within a margin of statistical error, nearly 100% of federal inmates and convicts are in prison for nothing.

That’s not justice. My thoughts on the jury system of today.

 

The Bundy bunch beat the odds here. And that is worth celebrating. From the New York Times:

PORTLAND, Ore. — Armed antigovernment protesters led by Ammon and Ryan Bundy were acquitted Thursday of federal conspiracy and weapons charges stemming from the takeover of a federally owned wildlife sanctuary in Oregon last winter.

The surprise acquittals of all seven defendants in Federal District Court were a blow to government prosecutors, who had argued that the Bundys and five of their followers used force and threats of violence to occupy the reserve. But the jury appeared swayed by the defendants’ contention that they were protesting government overreach and posed no threat to the public.

You may recall that one associate, LaVoy Finicum, was murdered by police as the others were arrested – gunned down in cold blood. Eleven others, playing the statistical game, plead guilty prior to the Bundy trial.

The government had a huge mountain of evidence. The defenses were rather maverick. And they could be as all that evidence still did not establish much. Frequently, when they don’t simply manufacture evidence and testimony from thin air, Justice [SIC] will overload a jury and hope the members become confused. Most do. Not here. In a remarkable turn of events, this jury actually paid attention and gave real thought to what they heard and saw.

Roger Roots, there in person in court, chronicled the various outrages and the unlikely outcome:

The defendants were accused of conspiring to prevent employees of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and Bureau of Land Management from performing their duties at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in rural eastern Oregon. Yet federal prosecutors failed to produce a single piece of evidence of any specific threat aimed at a USFWS or BLM employee.

The U.S. Justice Department alleged in Count 1 that the seven defendants (and many others) had engaged in an “armed standoff” at the federal wildlife refuge with the intent of scaring away the various government employees who normally work there. Every defendant was utterly innocent of the allegation. Some were not even aware that federal employees normally worked there). Several defendants were also charged with firearm possession in federal facilities with the intent to commit a federal felony (the conspiracy alleged in Count 1). And two defendants, Ryan Bundy and Ken Medenbach, were accused of stealing federal property valued over a thousand dollars.

In fact, Ammon Bundy and the other defendants took a monumental (and quite daring) stand for the plain text of the Constitution when they occupied the Malheur Refuge in January of this year. They pointed to Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the U.S. Constitution which seems to plainly forbid the federal government from owning land inside the states unless the states agree to sell such real estate to the federal government.

Needless to say, the present reality in the American west is in sharp contrast to this piece of constitutional text. The feds claim to own and control millions of acres of land in western states—most of which (such as the Malheur Refuge area) was never purchased from state legislatures or anyone else.

The most frightening revelations from the Malheur 7 trial involved the lengths which the U.S. government went to in its prosecution. During the Bundy occupation, the FBI literally took over the tiny nearby town of Burns, Oregon and transformed it into an Orwellian dystopia. There were license plate scanners mounted on utility poles, drones throughout the skies, and military transport vehicles speeding across the countryside. FBI agents captured and monitored every phone number connected between every accused occupier. Federal and state police appeared in such numbers that their total numbers will probably never be fully tallied.

The occupation was met with a bonanza of government spending by agencies at every level. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife and BLM employees who were supposedly too frightened to go to work were put up in luxury hotels, along with their families. (In the aftermath of the occupation, the feds have spent further millions to “rebuild” the Refuge, supposedly because the occupiers tainted it; prosecutors were openly planning on asserting the inflated “bill for damages” at sentencing in the event the defendants were convicted.)

Most startling of all were the undercover government informants that were revealed in the trial. After weeks of wrangling and arguing with defense lawyers, the Justice Department finally stipulated that at least nine undercover informants were planted among the Refuge occupiers. Thus, informants outnumbered the defendants on trial. One informant was even a “bodyguard” for Ammon Bundy and drove him to his arrest. Another informant admitted he trained occupiers in shooting and combat skills.

After a week of deliberating over the evidence, the jury came back with its verdict yesterday afternoon, acquitting every defendant. (Jurors said they were divided regarding an accusation that Ryan Bundy aided and abetted the theft of government property when he and others climbed utility poles and took down two of the government’s surveillance cameras.)

There are reports that the U.S. Justice Department spent $100 million on the case. But twelve Americans saw through the government’s cloud of disinformation and dealt a mighty blow for liberty.

I would call this less of a mighty blow for liberty and more of a small blow for jury nullification. John Whitehead agrees:

In finding the defendants not guilty—of conspiracy to impede federal officers, of possession of firearms in a federal facility, and of stealing a government-owned truck—the jury sent its own message to the government and those following the case: justice matters.

The Malheur occupiers were found not guilty despite the fact that they had guns in a federal facility (their lawyers argued the guns were “as much a statement of their rural culture as a cowboy hat or a pair of jeans”). They were found not guilty despite the fact that they used government vehicles (although they would argue that government property is public property available to all taxpayers). They were found not guilty despite the fact that they succeeded in occupying a government facility for six weeks, thereby preventing workers from performing their duties (as the Washington Post points out, this charge has also been used to prosecute extremist left-wingers and Earth First protesters).

Many other equally sincere activists with eloquent lawyers and ardent supporters have gone to jail for lesser offenses than those committed at the Malheur Refuge, so what made the difference here?

The jury made all the difference.

These seven Oregon protesters were found not guilty because a jury of their peers recognized the sincerity of their convictions, sympathized with the complaints against an overreaching government, and balanced the scales of justice using the only tools available to them: common sense, compassion and the power of the jury box.

Jury nullification works.

It works when it is applied by an intelligent jury. The problem is in the empaneling of such jurors. Again, here we saw a fluke. And the Bundy’s troubles are not ended. Ammon still faces the remaining federal count and the whole crew faces persecution in the Oregon state system (because Double Jeopardy is an outdated concept and the prohibition has all but vanished in America).

The odds of successfully assembling such a conscious jury elsewhere are slim at best. I always drew the jury pool analogy this way: go to any Walmart around midnight; pick out the first 12 shoppers you see; that is your jury. The results are predictable. Most juries favor whatever the government presents, truthful or lawful, or not. If they have doubts, the system is rigged in the government’s favor – rigged to obscure exculpatory evidence, limit defense arguments, and limit legal knowledge and questions from the jury.

jury-cat

This is more like it. College Humor.

It’s fortunate I had a little time to draft this up. I found an unrelated, recent, and far more typical case for comparison.

Four defendant’s in Richmond County, Georgia were charged with various counts of felony Medicaid fraud and a count of conspiracy to commit the frauds. The indictment said they defrauded the government program (itself nothing but a fraud) of more than $3 Million.

All four were acquitted last week of the underlying fraud charges. Three were acquitted entirely. The fourth, the alleged ringleader, was found guilty by the jury of the conspiracy count. He was promptly sentenced to the maximum prison term allowed, five years.

Here’s the problem here for justice. Under Georgia law, “A person commits the offense of conspiracy to commit a crime when he together with one or more persons conspires to commit any crime and any one or more of such persons does any overt act to effect the object of the conspiracy.” O.C.G.A. 16-4-8 (2010)(emphasis mine).

If all parties were on trial together and the jury acquitted all but one of them of all charges, how then could the same jury find that the lone defendant acted as part of a conspiracy? There’s that elements of the law thing that isn’t met here. The judge should have entered a directed verdict of acquittal as to the last conspiracy count, a correction of jury fallibility in the interests of justice.

Such interest is a rare as the Bundy verdict. Georgia appellate courts (and others around the nation) have ruled such inconsistencies (illegalities) are allowable. They seem to regard them as a consolation prize for the state, which isn’t suppose to lose. The overall stats for state charges and trials mirror the federal trends closely.

Of these two cases, the latter is the standard, the former a fluke. A happy fluke but just that. I don’t see any greater awakening. However, given recent developments against the establishment (Trump, BREXIT, etc.) such a movement may be launching. If so, we must do everything we can to foster and support it. If you find yourself on a jury, take the government to task.

One never knows when one will find oneself seated at the Defendant’s table. Safeguard others’ liberty today as yours might be on the line tomorrow.

Support truth, freedom, and justice.

New Hampshire Nullification

20 Monday Jun 2016

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

America, Athens, Courts, English common law, freedom, Georgia, government, injustice, jury, jury nullification, justice, law, New Hampshire, Rome, stupidity, trial, tyranny

They are serious about “Live Free or Die”in the Granite State. A buddy of mine just bought a house there and I’m sure he will appreciate the following “leave me alone” news.

The New Hampshire House passed a bill that would make it the first state in the nation to require courts to inform juries of their right to vote not guilty when the verdict would produce an unjust result. This right, which all juries possess but may not be aware of, is called jury nullification. The bill is now awaiting approval in the Senate.

  • Free Thought Project, June 9, 2016

Yes, all juries in the United States possess the right and authority to nullify a law as it affects a particular defendant via a not guilty vote. Think of it as a vote of conscious. Here’s an example from a case that really happened. An underaged, teenage girl took some naughty selfies and sent them to a friend. Kids do stupid things like that. Governments do worse. The state where she lived (actually happened in multiple places) charged her with manufacturing and distributing child pornography – pictures of herself. The government even acknowledged her as both the suspect and the victim. This is near the absolute height of stupidity. A conviction would put such an innocent (if silly) girl on the sex offender registry, which is supposed to protect innocent (even silly) people from real predators. Supposed to. Really, it’s just another state scheme for power.

If such a stupid case ever made it to a jury, the jury could (regardless of the technicalities of the law) return a verdict of “not guilty” as a guilt verdict (even if correct under the law and by the facts) would be an injustice to the young girl – the victim also, remember.

The Free Thought story goes on:

Even if government has proved that someone is guilty under its law, a jury can let the person go free if it disagrees with the law and the punishment. This is one of the few ways in which citizens have power within the system to counter the irrational tendencies of centralized bureaucracy.

New Hampshire currently allows the defense “to inform the jury of its right to judge the facts and the application of the law in relation to the facts in controversy.” However, the House bill would have judges explain this right to juries which, according to the Tenth Amendment Center, makes it “more likely that a juror will consider this option.”

Judges would be required to make the following statement:

“Even if you find the state has proved all of the elements of the offense charged beyond a reasonable doubt, you may still find that based upon the facts of this case, a guilty verdict will yield an unjust result, and you may find the defendant not guilty.”

…

If the New Hampshire bill makes it through the Senate and past the governor, it will be an historic moment in the American justice system. The current legal system is hostile to the idea of jury nullification, with judges threatening “secret juries” and police defying injunctions by removing activists.

However, in past times, jury nullification was viewed as a primary and necessary function of juries. As the Cato Institute points out:

“You can’t find references to “jury nullification” around the time of the American Revolution. That’s because it was considered to be part and parcel of what a jury trial was all about. If jurors thought the government was treating someone unjustly, they could acquit and restore that person’s liberty. Jury trials were celebrated–and explicit provisions were put into the Constitution so that the government could not take them away.”

Perhaps New Hampshire can remind the nation that we are not bound by the dictates of government, and we still have the power to protect our fellow citizens from state-sanctioned injustice.

Openly hostile is putting it mildly. A few states indirectly dance around the issue. For instance, the Georgia Constitution expressly says juries are the judges of the facts and the law. However, in reality in the Peach State – as in most jurisdictions, the judge declares himself the arbiter of what the law is and how the law applies to a given case. Judges give “charges” on the law to a jury at the conclusion of evidence and arguments. Some, most charges are “pattern” and are given preemptively by the judge right out of a handbook (complied by other judges in conference). The parties can make special suggestions. But, in no case, will it be permitted to tell the jury they can find a defendant not guilty because they disagree with the law.

Judges put people in jail for contempt and even jury tampering for even trying to get the word out about nullification. That’s hostility in an attempt to preserve power. As CATO points out, this is part of the traditional system for juries. Not just in America and England but all the way back to Athens and Rome. The violent prevention of nullification knowledge is just another part of the near-terminal decline of the trial by jury.

republicbroadcasting.org.

New Hampshire is often in the vanguard of freedom fighting in the U.S.A. Let’s hope the Senate and Governor feel as strongly about decent legal tradition as the House did.

…well…

I did a little follow-up research and discovered that the Senate did not follow through. Instead, on or around May 5th they let the Bill (HB 1270) die a procedural death. Very noble of them. Perhaps more than a few members will suffer a similar electoral fate come November. Anyway, there’s always next session. Live free or nullify.

Guilty: Students, Professors, and the Public Get Schooled by Big Brother

16 Wednesday Sep 2015

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

America, Amerika, anarchy, bombs, Courts, crime, double jeopardy, drugs, due process, evidence, evil, freedom, government, injustice, Islam, justice, Justice Department, law, police, police state, prisons, probable cause, rights, schools, Sir. William Blackstone, State, statism, students, teachers, Temple University, terrorists, The People

Several years ago, when I was actively practicing law, I held a discussion with a class of highly motivated and intelligent high school students (mostly upperclassmen).  My subject matter was the economic and cultural chaos wrought by the modern police state.  To my joy the students, nearly every one of them, were not only aware of the issues I covered but were deeply concerned about the world they would soon enter as adults.  Many embraced good old-fashioned anarchy as a positive response to the daily deluge of state-imposed evil.

Another thing which struck me, and which I mentioned to the young people, was how much their public, government high school resembled a prison – both in physical appearance and in operation.  Of this too they were all to aware.

It was a nice, new, modern facility in one of the trendiest parts of town.  It was where the money went when they didn’t want the private school bills.  The halls were clean, the grounds attractive, the people were pleasant.  However, I noticed things which seemed better suited for a correctional facility than a place of education.

Back then I regularly traveled around to various prisons and jails.  Most have a familiar layout and feel.  So too did this shiny new hall of academia.  The building was made of interlaced concrete blocks, bare of ornamentation – like a prison. The rectangular halls, with classrooms on either side, were laid out in wings or pods, fanning from a central hub – like a prison.  The central hub housed the administrative office in what looked like a tall glass control tower – like a prison. Near the doors were metal detectors (not in use that day) – like a prison.  The building was patrolled by armed officers – like a prison.

I had met some of these officers, all certified in law enforcement, before in professional settings.  I tried several cases stemming from “criminal” school misconduct.  The cases usually involved drugs, alcohol, cigarettes or other earth-destroying calamities.  Every single one of them was also devoid or things like probable cause, evidence, due process, and common sense.  I beat every single case.  And, it took quite the beating to win them.

Another ancient legal protection absent from modern Amerika, especially concerning students, is the prohibition against double jeopardy.  The theory, best summarized by Sir William Blackstone in the late eighteenth century was the “universal maxim of the common law of England, that no man is to be brought into jeopardy of his life more than once for the same offence.” (Emphasis mine.)  This theory is but legend now.  Our children often face triple jeopardy over things that are not crimes in the first place.  Here’s a real world example (possibly a combination of different cases, all real):

Johnny saw the school psychologist who suggested Johnny be prescribed mind-altering psychotropic drugs for his nonexistent attention deficit (in reality Johnny was just a boy).  Johnny’s doctor prescribed the narcotics, which otherwise would be considered illegal under state and federal law.  Johnny became semi-addicted.  The drugs caused his brain to slow down.  While giving him the appearance of being calm and receptive the dope also seriously impaired his health, to include his judgment. Johnny became a zombie.

Now, under the influence of these otherwise illegal drugs, practically mandated by his school, Johnny ran afoul of the school’s idiotic policy on otherwise illegal drugs.  School regulations dictate that any and all medications prescribed to a student must be held for the student’s use in the keeping of the school nurse. Johnny so kept his medicine in the school’s care and keeping.  Remember, the drugs in question diminished Johnny’s ability to rationalize and act appropriately.

One day, under the influence of these dangerous narcotics, Johnny forgot to drop off a few of his pills with the nurse.  He kept them in his book bag.  Mind you that Johnny never had any troubles whatsoever with his teachers, his classmates, or anyone else.

Out of the blue, without warning, probable cause, or a warrant, along came the local Sheriff’s department and their trusty drug-sniffing dog.  My students told me periodic drug sweeps were common in the prison…er..school.  The dog did his unlawful job well and promptly located Johnny’s pills.  The pills he was forced to take.  The pills that impaired his ability to reason.  The pills that caused him to forget to follow the procedures of the school that forced him to take the pills. Johnny was in trouble.

Jeopardy the first: Johnny had to appear at an administrative school hearing and faced expulsion or a year at the “alternative” school – like the supermax prison of the school world. Jeopardy the second, under asinine state law, as a minor with a driver’s license, Johnny’s possession of “drugs” put his license at risk and necessitated another administrative hearing before a state officer.  Third, and worst, Johnny faced a criminal proceeding and the possibility of jail time.

Luckily, Johnny had a good attorney and beat the triple threat.  He was back in class, soon weened himself off the school dope, and became a college honors student.  Others in the system are often not that lucky.  Maybe you know one of them. Maybe you were one of them.  Others have noticed this phenomenon and written about it.

Today John W. Whitehead wrote: Public School Students Are the New Inmates in the American Police State.

From the moment a child enters one of the nation’s 98,000 public schools to the moment she graduates, she will be exposed to a steady diet of draconian zero tolerance policies that criminalize childish behavior, overreaching anti-bullying statutes that criminalize speech, school resource officers (police) tasked with disciplining and/or arresting so-called “disorderly” students, standardized testing that emphasizes rote answers over critical thinking, politically correct mindsets that teach young people to censor themselves and those around them, and extensive biometric and surveillance systems that, coupled with the rest, acclimate young people to a world in which they have no freedom of thought, speech or movement.

If your child is fortunate enough to survive his encounter with the public schools, you should count yourself fortunate.

Most students are not so lucky.

By the time the average young person in America finishes their public school education, nearly one out of every three of them will have been arrested.

Whitehead.

Whitehead notes the utterly insane militarization of the school police, who shouldn’t even exist in the first place:

In their zeal to crack down on guns and lock down the schools, these cheerleaders for police state tactics in the schools might also fail to mention the lucrative, multi-million dollar deals being cut with military contractors such as Taser International to equip these school cops with tasers, tanks, rifles and $100,000 shooting detection systems.

Indeed, the transformation of hometown police departments into extensions of the military has been mirrored in the public schools, where school police have been gifted with high-powered M16 rifles, MRAP armored vehicles, grenade launchers, and other military gear. One Texas school district even boasts its own 12-member SWAT team.

As Whitehead states, the stories of abuse are “legion.” Students are being harassed, detained, and arrested for anything and everything.  One student was recently arrested for showing off his homemade clock at school.  Specifically, he was showing the clock off to his engineering teacher, who was duly impressed. Despite the fact the clock was obviously a time keeping device and impressed the shop teacher, its owner, a 14-year-old, was handcuffed and hauled away by police.

_85589317_4163c0e1-3c48-44ab-af0f-c53360632e81

Child Arrested for Chronometer Possession.  BBC.

The boy in question was a known Muslim and some feared his clock was a bomb. The criminal case was dismissed after the clock was verified to be a clock not a weapon.  I imagine the boy still faces school discipline in addition to the trauma he suffered during the incident.

This story almost makes sense.  Americans today face the threat of Islamic terror, largely because their government constantly stirs the Islamic world to the point of terrorism.  The same government then trains, equips and funds the known terrorists.  Worse, the government, almost out of malicious hate for the people, then import migrants from the areas where they have fostered hate and terror.  You can see this is definitely a problem.  But, it’s a problem with the state not with an aspiring young engineer.

Your government does not care, at all.  Frequently neither does the media nor the television-numbed people themselves.  Obey those laws!  Trust the state! Arrested means guilty, period!

William L. Anderson today recounts the horror story of the arrest and unlawful prosecution by the U.S. “Justice” Department of Xiaoxing Xi, Chairman of the physics department of Temple University, on espionage charges: Paranoia and Pernicious Prosecutions: The Department of Injustice Continues its War Against the Innocent.

The once-glorious standard of American criminal law – guilty beyond a reasonable doubt – no longer exists de facto in U.S. courts, and especially in federal courts. Furthermore, federal intervention in certain legal areas – and especially when highly-politicized accusations of sexual assault are made – has made it extremely difficult for charged individuals to mount a defense, even when a charge is ludicrous on its face.

Let me further explain. Had there been a trial federal prosecutors would have presented their evidence and Dr. Xi would have had to then rebut with his evidence. However, as became painfully obvious, prosecutors had no evidence. Instead, they had “evidence” that on its face was untrue because they had the wrong material. One imagines that prosecutors and their “expert” witnesses would have given jurors a lot of scientific terminology that would have been confusing, and when jurors are confused, they usually end up siding with the prosecution, since most Americans believe that an indictment itself is “proof” of guilt.

It would have been up to Dr. Xi and his defense to prove that federal agents had presented the wrong set of blueprints. The feds would have falsely claimed that theirs was the correct set, even though by then they surely would have known they were presenting false claims. This last point is important, because it is a crime to knowingly present false information to a jury, but prosecutors never are disciplined for doing just that.

Anderson.

As Anderson notes, the feds dropped their case once it was obvious they had no evidence.  Xi pretty much lost everything – his reputation, his position, his peace of mind as an innocent American – all because of groundless charges brought without evidence.  Evidence is (or used to be) critical for a criminal case and conviction.  In my career I had similar criminal cases in federal and state courts fall apart due to a complete lack of evidence.  More on some of those in another column or two.

Many do not care about standards of evidence, due process or about the rights of people in general.  See: here, and here, and here.  That last “here” link is to a story I did about an innocent man shot by the police in Atlanta in his own home for no reason.  That narrative has played out yet again:

Fearing for their lives, California deputies opened fire on a man who was recording them with a cell phone from the garage of his home Friday, claiming they thought it was a gun.

Sacramento County sheriff’s deputies then searched the man’s home, finding no guns, before they apologized and went on their way.

Fortunately, Danny Sanchez survived the shooting, ending up with only bullet fragments in his legs, which he was having removed through surgery on Friday.

And although deputies apologized to Sanchez, they are pretty much unapologetic for their actions because, you know, officer safety.

 Carlos Miller, PINAC News.

Pitiful action by pitiful men.  Scared of a cellphone.  “Sorry we shot you.  Well, have a good day, sir!”  And the lemmings among you will still praise the deputies and chastise the victim.  “He should have obeyed the law!”  He did.  “You have to respect the police!”  No known disrespect even after they almost murdered him. Reality is doing a really poor job convincing the state-worshipers their’s is a false god.

For you, the sane, eye with distrust the machinations of government: its foreign policies; its immigration policies; all its policies; its schools; its courts; its police. All the laws and all the agents serve but the government and its owners. You and I are either obedient servants or criminal enemies of the state.

Note: This article was originally intended as two separate parts. As the subject matters – schools as prisons and more prosecutorial/police misconduct are related, I combined them, here.  This also promotes reading economy.  You’re welcome.

The Sword of Government

14 Saturday Feb 2015

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns

≈ 7 Comments

Tags

America, Augusta Chronicle, corruption, Courts, death, Gandolf, Georgia, God, government, Hitler, injustice, jury, justice, law, Lord of the Rings, murder, Paul, Romans 13, Satan, South Carolina, Stalin

This morning I read a letter to the editor of the Augusta (GA) Chronicle wherein the author proposed streamlining the dead penalty process.  The author had, I think, a mild semblance of good intentions behind his missive.  He certainly picked a sympathetic test case.  However, his proposal is extraordinarily dangerous.  And, unfortunately, his thinking is all too common in modern America.

His letter recounted the guilty plea entered by a South Carolina defendant accused of murdering a police officer.  As I have written elsewhere most criminal cases end in plea “bargains.” By entering his plea the defendant avoided the possibility of the death penalty.  This is a common practice.

The author argued the defendant deserved to die for his actions.  Perhaps he does.  I am not opposed to the death penalty per se.  Under the right circumstances it is a fitting punishment.  But, as I have written before, an American courtroom is one of the last places on earth one may find appropriate circumstances.

The author notes, correctly, that in South Carolina and Georgia (all civilized jurisdictions) a jury’s decision in a death penalty case must be unanimous – all of the jurors must agree the crime of murder was committed by the accused.  After reaching that conclusion they must separately and unanimously decide if death is the appropriate punishment.

Our letter writer calls on “both state legislatures of Georgia and South Carolina to change the law that requires a unanimous decision by a jury for the defendant to receive the death penalty.”  He proclaims: “When heinous crimes are committed, it should only take a simple majority of jurors for the person to receive the death penalty.”

His most disturbing and telling comment is: “The government should be the sword of God, and the guilty party should be hanged in public in front of the courthouse.”  The government should be the sword of God…  I submit he really believes the government should be … God.  This sentiment is as common as it is alarming.

First, as a legal matter, there is a sober reason why jury verdicts should be unanimous. In a criminal case, especially a death penalty case, the burden of proving the underlying facts and elements of the crime rests solely on the state.  The state must prove these elements beyond all reasonable doubt.  This means a reasonably prudent man (twelve of them) must have no logical reason to question the defendant’s guilt.

JurorsWEB_20120112144338_320_240

(Google.)

I’m working an article about the origins and logic behind the jury system.  In short, it is a last check against a tyrannical prosecution.  Should a corrupt government bring a baseless (or sloppy) case against an accused individual, the jury stands between that individual and injustice – or so it was intended.  Having multiple jurors eliminates the possibility of individual juror prejudice co-opting justice.  In critical murder cases the unanimity rule adds a final layer of protection.  If only one juror maintains doubt, the whole jury is “hung.”

This protection is in place for all of us.  The Chronicle letter was followed (online) by several reader comments.  All but one wholeheartedly agreed with the author.  The lone holdout noted a Ohio case where three men were convicted or murder and sentenced to death.  After 39 years in prison they were exonerated in a crime they never committed.  This too is an all to common occurrence in America.  Hang them and let God sort them out?

If I read the author’s thought correctly, then I suppose he would really like to dispense with the jury and trial altogether.  In his mind an accusation should lead to immediate execution …  for God’s glory, no doubt.

I also suspect he subscribes to the simplistic reading of Romans 13 – that government is a righteous extension of God’s will.  Paul qualified this passage in terms of just law and order.  Should that government derive its authority and actions from Natural Law this assumption would be correct.  I do not know of any government, ever, which has so existed.  By their logic, blanket 13’ers would have to sanction any and all government actions as the will of God – including those of Stalin and Hitler.

The “sword of God?”  Government is just a sword – pure brute force – imposing the will of the ruling (Godly or not) on its subjects.  As I said above, I think the writer would supplant the Almighty with earthly governance.  This blasphemy is in vogue across the political spectrum.

CNN news anchor and Fordham Law School educated Chris Cuomo recently espoused the view that laws and rights come from earthly government and not God.  ‘Our Laws Do Not Come From God’.

Maryland Congressman Elijah Cummings goes further – he says people “come to government to feed their souls.”  Rep. Cummings: People ‘Come to Government To Feed Their Souls’.

The views and quotes show plainly that the new American religion is statism (a pitiful, second-rate brand of Satanism).

As to the suggestion the South Carolina defendant deserved to die, I recall several lines from The Lord of the Rings.  While discussing Gollum’s crimes, Frodo asserted that Gollum deserved to die.  Tentatively agreeing, Gandalf answered masterfully: “Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.”  As true in South Carolina or Georgia as in Middle Earth.

 

 

← Older posts

Perrin Lovett

From Green Altar Books, an imprint of Shotwell Publishing

From Green Altar Books, an imprint of Shotwell Publishing

Perrin Lovett at:

Perrin on Geopolitical Affairs:

Archives

  • December 2025
  • November 2025
  • October 2025
  • September 2025
  • August 2025
  • July 2025
  • June 2025
  • May 2025
  • April 2025
  • March 2025
  • February 2025
  • January 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • September 2024
  • August 2024
  • July 2024
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • June 2012

Prepper Post News Podcast by Freedom Prepper (sadly concluded, but still archived!)

Blog at WordPress.com.

  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • PERRIN LOVETT
    • Join 42 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • PERRIN LOVETT
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.