ALL RIGHT, NOW I'M
CONFUSED. OR AM I?
A GIFT FOR THE GOD.
A GIFT FROM THE GOD
GOBLINS RUNNING WILD
Jefferson was plainly alarmed by the possibility of
You seem to consider the judges the ultimate arbiters of all
Jefferson plainly had an answer against judicial tyranny. constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges … and their power [are] the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and are not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves … . When the legislative or executive functionaries act unconstitutionally, they are responsible to the people in their elective capacity. The exemption of the judges from that is quite dangerous enough. I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society, but the people themselves. …. — Letter to Mr. Jarvis, Sept, 1820
This case of Marbury and Madison is continually cited by bench and bar, as if it were settled law, without any animadversions on its being merely an obiter dissertation of the Chief Justice … . But the Chief Justice says, “there must be an ultimate arbiter somewhere.” True, there must; but … .
He saw where judicial tyranny was leading. The ultimate arbiter is the people …. — Letter to Judge William Johnson, June 1823
When all government, domestic and foreign, in little as in great things, shall be
He saw judicial tyranny as a subtle undermining of the Constitution. drawn to Washington as the centre of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another, and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated …. — Letter to C. Hammond, July 1821
The judiciary of the United States is the subtle corps of sappers and miners constantly
Jefferson saw judicial tyranny as an all-out assault on the Constitution. working underground to undermine our Constitution from a co-ordinate of a general and special government to a general supreme one alone. This will lay all things at their feet. … I will say, that “ against this every man should raise his voice,” and, more, should uplift his arm … — Letter to Thomas Ritchie, Sept. 1820
I fear, dear Sir, we are now in such another crisis [as when the Alien and Sedition Laws were enacted], with this difference only,
He saw judicial tyranny as the greatest danger to the nation. that the judiciary branch is alone and single-handed in the present assaults on the Constitution. But its assaults are more sure and deadly, as from an agent seemingly passive and unassuming. — Letter to Mr. Nicholas, Dec. 1821
… there is no danger I apprehend so much as the consolidation of our government by the noiseless, and therefore unalarming, instrumentality of the Supreme Court. —
For judges to usurp the powers of the legislature is unconstitutional judicial tyranny.
Letter to William Johnson, Mar. 1823
… One single object ... will
entitle you to the endless gratitude of society; that of restraining judges from usurping legislation. — Letter to Edward Livingston, Mar. 1825
More than once Jefferson expressed his desire for a Constitutional amendment that would clearly block the power the judiciary had unconstitutionally usurped, which they began to do in 1805, in the case of Marbury v. Madison, and got away with it. A Constitutional Amendment to Thwart Judicial Tyranny?
But the Constitution did not give the judiciary power to legislate, nor to decide for the other branches what is, or is not, constitutional. That is a power they left with the people, according to the Ninth and Tenth Amendments:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to
deny or disparage others retained by the people. -- Amendment IX
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. -- Amendment X
Content on this page requires a newer version of Adobe Flash Player.
OUTSIDE IT'S AMERICA
what would be the capacity of law enforcement
and of the courts to SUPRESS this kind of SPEECH?" - Judge A. Howard Matz , PRE-TRIAL HEARING OF KILLERCOP.COM
A QUESTION FOR AMERICA:
Is "pretty good" pretty much like " pretty clear?" Because I'm " pretty sure" it is not. I know, it's complex. But then again, I'm officially nutzzzzzz, until certified (.pdf) un-nutzzzzzz, in a competent court of the law. So I am waiting on the law. It sure is not speedy...but it is baffled.
I'm all a Twitter waiting to see your reaction, to my reaction, to your Treatment and the promised Restoration. You'll just die when you see what I have in store for everyone involved in the story in 2012. At least that's my intent! 'Till then...
you know you have to look, there!! ABOVE!!
"another person" and "the person of another.
Read the plan, promptly!! A man's life, freedom and liberty are at stake!!! And it's probably a prudent thing to do, but don't speak about it!
In fact, don't even think about it, especially the cowards and the easily frightened children!
THE FOLLOWING TAKES PLACE APRIL 9, 2002, IN LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA. CENTRAL DISTRICT. BETWEEN 9AM AND 10AM
"AS TO ALL OF THE OTHER DEFENDANTS, YOU
ARE HERE BECAUSE YOU HAVE BEEN CHARGED WITH A CRIMINAL
OFFENSE AGAINST THE UNITED STATES.
THE NATURE OF THE OFFENSE IS DESCRIBED IN THE
INDICTMENT OR COMPLAINT AND THE ATTACHED AFFIDAVIT THAT YOU
HAVE RECEIVED OR WILL RECEIVE.
YOU HAVE THE FOLLOWING RIGHTS:
YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE REPRESENTED BY A " LAWYER" AT
ALL STAGES OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.
YOU ALSO HAVE THE RIGHT TO HAVE A "LAWYER" PRESENT
WITH YOU ANY TIME THAT YOU ARE QUESTIONED BY A LAW.
IF YOU WISH TO HIRE A "LAWYER," OR IF YOU WISH TO
TALK FURTHER WITH A "LAWYER" BEFORE I PROCEED WITH YOUR CASE, I
WILL GIVE YOU TIME TO DO SO. IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO HIRE A "LAWYER," I
WILL APPOINT AN ATTORNEY TO RE-PRESENT YOU."
DO YOU READ ENGLISH? KILLERCOP?
KILLERCOP:" I READ ENGLISH."
THE COURT: "OKAY. ALL RIGHT. DO YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING.
MS. DUARTE: "NO YOUR HONOR."
THE COURT: "ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO FIND THAT THE
COMPETENT AND CAPABLE OF UNDERSTANDING HIS
THAT HE'S HAD ACCESS TO AN ATTORNEY IN THIS CASE
[BUT NO LAWYER-AND NO EXPERTS EITHER].
THAT HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS WERE READ TO HIM BY
ME THIS MORNING. THAT HE'S BEEN GIVEN
A FORM OF HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.
AND THAT'S GOING TO BE WHERE THE RECORD IS GOING TO
KILLERCOP: "I'M SORRY, YOUR HONOR. THIS IS A
COURT OF RECORD?"
THE COURT: "YES. THIS IS A COURT OF RECORD."
KILLERCOP:" I WOULD LIKE THE COURT TO NOTE THAT
I'M PROCEEDING WITH ALL OF MY RIGHTS RESERVED WITH THE LACK
THE COURT: "THAT'S - - THAT'S GRANTED.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THAT. ALL YOUR RIGHTS ARE RESERVED."
EXCEPT FOR THAT ENTITLEMENT
NOT TO BE TRIED. OR DUE PROCESS. OR EVEN THE RIGHT TO BE HERE. THE WAIVER OF YOUR RIGHTS IS IMPLIED. ITS NOW A PART OF THE PROCESS. SO YOU FEEL ASSURED, AMERICA?
Killercop Finds Department . A.K.A. Lifes A Bitch, Then You Meet One In of Justice "implicitly waived" all rights to object A Court Of No Law.
"For you to go to bat and take
the case to trial or
even to pursue a plea, if that's what you were alluding to
before, with these lawyers is going to be totally against your
interest and against my duty to assure that you get effective
assistance of Counsel." ~ Judge A. Howard Matz, Pg. 19, Sept. 23, 2002, Pre-trial of killercop.com.
Contempt Of Cop
Washingtonpost.com - ' Contempt of Cop' Continued from Page 5 New D.C. police recruits were keenly aware of what they saw as deficiencies...
Blacks are arrested on 'contempt of cop' charge at higher rate - Blacks are booked by Seattle police for obstructing a public officer eight times as often as whites when population is taken into account, a Seattle P-I investigation of six years...
Henry Louis Gates' Contempt Of Cop Emptywheel - At tonight's nationally televised press conference, a reporter asked President Obama a question about the July 16 arrest of famed Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates. Obama set off...
Contempt of Cop' by William Norman Grigg - The police are to the government as the edge is to the knife, insists sociologist David Bayley, who apparently couldn't explain why the typical...
Expert Officer displayed 'contempt of cop' reaction Internal Affairs Contempt Of Cop II
CAMERA IS THE NEW SPEAK FOR GUN IN THE WILD, WILD WEST! - It's more about ' contempt of cop' than the violation of the wiretapping law.
Welcome to America Now step inside the jail cell - The audio exchange in this video was apparently recorded at the U.S. Canada border after a Canadian displayed contempt-of-cop towards the American law enforcement officer asking questions.
Contemptible police tactics - Cops raid the home of a licensed medical marijuana provider in Washington, handcuff the fourteen year old son and put a gun to his head, and search the nineteen year old daughter and take the contents of her mickey-mouse wallet.
How To Survive Traffic Stops in America, Submit, Instantly! - What the cops want is immediate obedience and submission. Many cops are ex-military and view the civilian motorists of America about like they viewed the hapless peasants of Iraq and Afghanistan, that is, with contempt, not as fellow citizens deserving of civility and respect. It is a possibly lethal mistake to do anything other than submit, instantly and obey! Or be ready to shoot first. But aim high.
My radio interview with Katherine Albrecht - Carlos Miller Photography is Not a Crime is interviewed by Katherine Albrecht, activist, radio host and privacy advocate, Tuesday afternoon where they discussed his blog, his arrests, the situation in the United Kingdom and the spread of contempt of cop cases that are popping up on the internet on a regular basis.
EVEN THE BRITISH ARE LAUGHING AT YA!!