[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[lawful] Jury Nullification...
hi col & jm367
ahh, the wonder of it all
what happens when what appears as a Peer, is not a Peer
here's how i put it recently to DARLENE
regards
ft
DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR COUNTY OF TULSA
STATE OF OKLAHOMA
(Under Objection and Protest)
STATE OF OKLAHOMA, ) CASE NO.:
CM-2004-3759
(
Plaintiff,
Unknown Fiction, ) PURPORTED
CHARGES:
(
47 O.S. 6-303(B), 47 O.S. 7-606(A),
vs. )
47 O.S. 12-417(A) and 47 O.S. 1151(A)
(
Frank Anthony Taucher, ) HEARING
DATE: August 17, 2004
(
Sovereign Man Created in His Image ) NATURE AND CAUSE: Unknown
Objection and Protest Regarding Any Decision Adverse to the Private Affairs
of Frank Anthony Taucher from other than Trial by Jury of Peers
1. I object and protest the rendering of any decision by DARLENE
CRUTCHFIELD adverse to My Life, Liberty, Property or Pursuit of Happiness.
2. If the sua sponte and other ministerial duties demanded in this
Court of Record are not performed, I demand Trial by Jury of My Peers and
full subpoena power prior to Trial on the question of the bona fides of
DARLENE CRUTCHFIELD and the authority of DARLENE CRUTCHFIELD to refuse to
compel the court clerk to certify and seal with prejudice as to its renewal
the dismissal of the instant matter.
3. This Court of Record will note that My Peers in said Trial by Jury
specifically do not include persons, citizens of the United States,
residents, social security recipients, government employees, federal
personnel, fictions, registered voters, human resources and so on.
4. This Court of Record will note that My Peers do include the
Sovereign People as identified in My 180 page "Before YHWH Almighty"
affidavit.
5. Such trial will be in the Sovereign Court of Record as STATE OF
OKLAHOMA and I have agreed in said 180 page affidavit and notorious Public
Record defaults entered into the instant court file.
-----Original Message-----
From: jm367 [mailto:jm367@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 11:33 PM
To: citizensoftheUSofA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [citizensoftheUSofA] Re: Jury Nullification...
We have been national citizens unequivocablly since the amendment of 1819.
Before that, the British contested the question by impressing sailors of
British heritage found on American vessels and scholars like Story were
doubtful whether the Constitution had any citizens. Even so, the Supreme
Court always deemed a State citizen to be also citizen of the United States
of America. The early cases are full of such declarations.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Col. Lucius B Marsh" <sueyouone99674@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <citizensoftheUSofA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 2:52 AM
Subject: RE: [citizensoftheUSofA] Re: Jury Nullification...
>
> I found that in an old law book on the "Appelate
> System" describing our courts as "an appelate system
> for the allocation and re-distribution of all goods,
> resources and services". De-facto juries have no idea
> they are deciding upon "null and void law" IF THE
> COMMISSIONER DOESN'T LIKE THE VERDICT HE CAN ORDER A
> "DIRECTED VERDICT" FORGET ABOUT JURIES THEY ARE YOUR
> ENEMY, TOO. IMPEACH THEM BECUASE THEY ARE NOT YOUR
> PEERS! How do you have common people, NATIONAL US
> CITIZENS, sitting in a State court(#%&@#) How can a
> "person" with less knowledge than YOU about law be
> your PEER!
> I love old law books, don't you
> --- Frank Taucher <taucher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > wow
> >
> > cool
> >
> > i'd always suspected that's what the guys who
> > couldn't handle a wave were
> > whispering to each other while sitting on their
> > boardws
> >
> > just so that any of us might not goof up, however,
> > is there any place in the
> > well-settled and long-established Public Record in
> > support of this statement
> >
> > tnx in advance
> >
> > regards
> > ft
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Col. Lucius B Marsh
> > [mailto:sueyouone99674@xxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 8:16 PM
> > To: citizensoftheUSofA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [citizensoftheUSofA] Re: Jury
> > Nullification...
> >
> >
> > juries are called "defacto juries in pursuit of void
> > laws"
> > --- "tthor.geo" <tthor.geo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > My research suggests that, in California, there
> > is, at least, a strong
> > > possibility that we may have made a whole bunch of
> > invalid
> > > presumptions about "our" court system. The
> > following THEORY covers
> > > many of the observed phenomena at least as well as
> > many other
> > > theories.
> > >
> > > WHAT IF:
> > > 1. We are ALL presumed to be individuals
> > considered to be part of the
> > > unorganized Militia of a given state?
> > >
> > > 2. When we are "summoned" for jury duty, we are
> > actually being "called
> > > into active military service" by the state and
> > paid [a pittance
> > > admittedly, mileage and per diem] for such
> > service.
> > >
> > > 3. So, the defendant [also presumed to be in
> > active duty service to
> > > the state] is being subjected to the equivalent of
> > a special
> > > court-martial [a step more harsh than a Captain's
> > Mast] before "his
> > > peers", other called-up militia-men.
> > >
> > > IF the foregoing were true, the jury would
> > legitimately be an advisory
> > > body. The "judge", as everyone's superior officer,
> > could override the
> > > jury's verdict by exercise of [command, not
> > judicial] discretion AND
> > > the Constitution would legitimately not have any
> > place in the
> > > courtroom TO THE EXTENT that the U. S. Supreme
> > Court has not extended
> > > Constitutional protections to members of the
> > military services. BUT,
> > > the "judge" would be functioning as an Executive
> > branch actor, not as
> > > a Judicial branch actor.
> > >
> > > The major flies in this particular ointment are:
> > IF I am presumed to
> > > be on active duty in the state's militia, WHY
> > don't I know about it?;
> > > WHAT is my rank/pay scale;? WHY am I not getting
> > paid;? WHERE is my
> > > retirement [Social Security?];? WHERE are my rifle
> > and ammunition?
> > > WHY has the prosecution NOT invoked the UNIFORM
> > CODE OF MILITARY
> > > JUSTICE???
> > >
> > >
> > > Joyce <joycer@xxxx> wrote:
> > > > If this true, how come a Judge can change a
> > > verdict? I believe there
> > > is no jurisdiction in admiralty for juries, They
> > are all show trials
> > > to once again give us an illusion of liberty.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > =====
> > )STEVEN ALLAN GRANT
> > Steven-Allan, Grant
> > native-born Man of Massachuset Wabanaki First
> > Nations American Inhabitant
> > Search U.S. of A law
> > http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/amlaw/lawhome.html
> > http://www.native-languages.org/mikmaq.htm
> > Rooting out Corp-gov crime Jefferson Party
> > http://www.jusbelli.com/ R.C.
> > Sproul debunking false doctrine
> > http://www.ligonier.org/radio/index.php
##########################################################################
# The Lawful List! Dedicated to learning and understanding how we're #
# strayed away from lawful venue for benefits of legal fraud. To #
# unsubscribe, send email to lawful-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and in the #
# subject line put "unsubscribe". Web access for account management is #
# http://www.thenostromo.com/cgi-bin/lsg2.cgi All other questions #
# should be sent paraclet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx #
# Join us on irc.thenostromo.com:6667 #lawful #
##########################################################################