Plea Bargains and the Right to a Trial by JuryBy Keith Broaders In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right toa public trial, by an impartial jury of thedistrict wherein the crime shall have been committed. Nowadays, that right is denied to 98% of the people facing criminal charges. Why? Rather than facing a possible conviction for a serious offense, many of those accused plead guilty to a lesser offense and may have never even committed any crime at all. In many cases, the possibility of being found guilty by a jury is a risk that most defendants are unwilling to take. As a result, they plead guilty to a crime they may not have even committed in order to avoid the risk of a longer sentence. The system that was created to provide equal justice is now coercing suspects to plead guilty without a proper jury trial. The guilt or innocence of an individual accused of a crime should be determined by a jury of their peers and not by judges and prosecuting attorneys. An individual who has not committed a crime should never be convinced to plead guilty to a lesser crime just to avoid prosecution. When a fully informed jury is in charge the people rather than the judges and the attorneys are in control. Find our more about this at the Fully Informed Jury Association (FIJA). Keith Broaders writes for The Tenth Amendment Center, where this article first appeared. good luck with that garbage. You obviously never been dragged to court for a frivolous charge. There is no justice. You are assumed guilty once you agree that you will stand under the charges. Its a Fn game and you will more than likely lose. And when you lose, youll lose badreal bad. Its all lies and twisted logic once you enter the justice system. Its a whole different specie of people that will do anything to see that you are their victim. Get a clue. The system is rigged against you from the very start. You are powerless. Stay away from courts. Its all about privatization and kickbacks. Welcome to american democracy. Welcome to american democracy Wow, you do not even know what type of government we have, so how can you expect to have fair trials, or any other lawful thing here? America is NOT a democracy. America is a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC. That means that all authority is delegated to specific branches and named-in-writing-offices within the branches. That those people WHO SERVE WITHIN those branches and offices are NOT the government, but serve within it; and like all employees have a written contract that they are REQUIRED to follow. But hey, as long as most people here in the USA will not even read the US Constitution a VERY short document because it lists (enumerates) the few actual powers the federal government has, as it IS in writing backed, by a solemn, lawfully required Oath that binds the contract even tighter; and your state Constitution (another document of delegated powers that will be a bit longer I am sure) then those that SERVE WITHIN our governments can do whatever they like and you would not know if they actually are breaking laws and can not only be removed, but prosecuted. It is important to also realize that the American people have constitutionally assigned duties to hold those that serve within our governments accountable for all actions they do. Or even how or what tools that ONLY belong to the people are that are listed within the US Constitution and that is often unlawfully used against the people. The people do that through the Militia, the Grand Jury Investigations that the PEOPLE call forth, Grand Juries, and jury trials where the jury decides if the law is good or needs to be stopped immediately, if the judge is using the required Good Behavior (doing their duties as constitutionally assigned and taking and KEEPING their Oaths) if not then they need to be charged, get their jury trial and be removed if they broke any of their contract. Ah well, I guess you are another who does not realize that freedom does mean responsibility fro the people also. America is in the mess it is in because you, and many others, have been so propagandized that you wont even bother learning what type of government we have here. Heres some hints if you are interested; As Mr. Michael LeMieux says so well here: The Constitution has very little to do with the American citizen. It was written to establish a Federal Government and to place the boundaries by which that government would operate. The constitution was never designed to provide or enumerate the rights of the citizens but to restrain the federal government from meddling in state and ultimately citizen affairs. Justice Sandra Day OConnor: The Constitution does not protect the sovereignty of States for the Mack and Printz v. United States: The Framers rejected the concept of a central government that would act upon and through the States, and instead designed a system in which the State and Federal Governments would exercise concurrent authority over the people. The Federal Governments power would be augmented immeasurably and impermissibly if it were able to impress into its service and at no cost to itself the police officers of the 50 States Federal control of state officers would also have an effect upon the separation and equilibration of powers between the three branches of the Federal Government itself. Alexander Hamilton: There is no position which depends on clearer principles that that every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative St John Tucker: The congress of the United States possesses no power to regulate, or interfere with the domestic concerns, or police of any state: it belongs not to them to establish any rules respecting the rights of property; nor will the constitution permit any prohibition of arms to the people; Abraham Lincoln: We, the people, are the rightful masters of both congress and the courts not Benjamin Franklin: In free governments the rulers are the servants, and the people their superiors and sovereigns. For the former, therefore, to return among the latter was not to degrade but to promote them. Dr. Edwin Vieira: This has nothing to do with personalities or subjective ideas. Its a matter of what the Constitution provides The government of the United States has never violated anyones What are the defining characteristics of a limited government? They are its disabilities; what it does not have legal authority to do. Look at the First Amendment What does it do? It guarantees freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion. But how does it do that? I quote: Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press etcetera. * Grand Jury The grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the branches described in the first three Articles. It is a constitutional fixture in its own right. In fact the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional government, serving as a kind of buffer or Thus, citizens have the unbridled right to empanel their own grand juries and present True Bills of indictment to a court, which is then required to commence a criminal proceeding. Our Founding Fathers presciently thereby created a buffer the people may rely upon for justice, when public officials, including judges, criminally violate the law. (Misbehavior, break the Good Behaviour requirement) The grand jury is an institution separate from the courts, over whose functioning the courts do not preside, we think it clear that, as a general matter at least, no such supervisory judicial authority Although the grand jury normally operates, of course, in the courthouse and under judicial auspices, its institutional relationship with the judicial branch has traditionally been, so to speak, at arms length. Judges direct involvement in the functioning of the grand jury has generally been confined to the constitutive one of calling the grand jurors together and administering their oaths of office. The grand jurys functional independence from the judicial branch is evident both in the scope of its power to investigate criminal wrongdoing, and in the manner in which that power is exercised. The grand jury can investigate merely on suspicion that the law is being violated, or even because it wants assurance that it is not. It need not identify the offender it suspects, or even the precise Recognizing this tradition of independence, we have said the 5th Amendments constitutional guarantee presupposes an investigative body acting independently of either prosecuting attorney or judge Given the grand jurys operational separateness from its constituting court, it should come as no surprise that we have been reluctant to invoke the judicial supervisory power as a basis for prescribing modes of grand jury procedure. Over the years, we have received many requests to exercise supervision over the grand jurys evidence-taking process, but we have refused them all. it would run counter to the whole history of the grand jury institution to permit an indictment to be challenged on the ground that there was incompetent or inadequate evidence before the grand jury. (Nor would it be lawful of them to do so.) Justice Antonin Scalia writing for the majority said In the Supreme Court case of United States v. Williams, 112 S.Ct. 1735, 504 U.S. 36, 118 L.Ed.2d 352 (1992) Yes, all true but you left out the part that our governments have been corporatized and lawyers have had 150 years to game the system at every point into tricking/defrauding us into granting our consent to be bound by their corporate rules (i.e. Revised Code of Washington) through such things as driver and marriage licenses. As you address, these avowed liars and frauds sitting in our government offices have completely co-opted the peoples direct controls such as calling grand juries. These corporations are of course driven by money which is why we have had the explosion of their oxy-moronic victimless crimes. When we see those running this scam committing outright criminal acts against us to extort money at the point of a gun we are dealing with treasona capital crime. We are at war. True, and it goes way beyond that. But it is our fault, because WE allowed the dumbing down. We allowed the corrupt to remain serving within our government. We allow them to invade other nations in our name when they are REQUIRED to only DEFEND the USA when attacked which we have not been. Plus those serving within our legislative branch are REQUIRED to only fund any military for two years AFTER a congressionally declared war, or they are PERSONALLY responsible for what was spent. Yea, personally as it is, misappropriation of funds, and their Oath with both requiring PERSONAL responsibility for their actions. That, BTW, goes for all who are REQUIRED in the USA to take and keep the Oath to support and defend our nation. Then there is all these crimes such as First Degree Murder power (assassination power) that Obama gave himself and WE ALLOW this to go on. When every single person involved in any and every way is responsible for committing first degree murder we allow that also. We allow them all involved in politics and law in any and every way to lie, steal, cheat, etc. Start where you can if you are interested meaning read and learn the documents that make up our nation. I also highly recommend Hillsdale College free online classes particularly on immigration and regulation eye openers. Cal, you have been brain-washed and dumbed down to the extreme. So very harsh and so very true! There is no such thing as a Constitution anymore. ANYWHERE! Most Constitutionalists favor the jury system, provided jury nullification (a jurors right to judge a law as unjust, oppressive, or inapplicable to any particular case) is in force. However, even if jury nullification were restored, juries would still render decisions based upon each jurys collective standard of morality or immorality. A jury drawn from the [Biblically] uninstructed population is no better equipped to administer the just requirements of Gods law than a corrupt judge.35 A jury awarded $2.3 million to Stella Liebeck when she burned herself with McDonalds coffee, and a jury found O.J. Simpson innocent on all charges. Although it might be argued that it only takes one juror to dissent and prevent a railroad job, most people lack the independence and resolution to resist the will of a majority. More often than not, todays jurors reflect the type of people we are warned against in Exodus 23: Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment. (Exodus 23:2) Juries produce, at best, erratic justice. Without Yahwehs law as the standard, jury decisions are based The character of the courts, judges, and legal system cannot be long maintained if the character of the people is delinquent and degenerate. Courts and judges do not exist in a vacuum: they are part of the faith, culture, and moral standards of the people at large, of the nation of which they are a part.36 And there shall be, like people, like priest: and I will punish them for their ways. (Hosea 4:9) The constitutional right of a trial by a jury of impartial peers is regarded by Americans especially For more, see online Chapter 6 Article 3: Judicial Usurpation of Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective. Click on my picture, then our website. Go to Online Books page, click on the top entry, and scroll down to Chapter 6. But what you are forgetting is that the DAs and judges tell the jury (unlawfully) what they are allowed to consider, and what they must decide on. They guide the juries in directions that they want the case to go. But those things only could/can happen because the people refuse to read the US Constitution, their state Constitution. They let other think for them. The people do not bother to understand that our nation was founded on Jesus Christ, not religion per se. That those who serve within our governments are forbidden to create a government backed religion (think 501C3s), nor can they force any religion upon the people and that is the only duties delegated to those who serve within our governments, and it IS in writiing. Patrick Henry: It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and Benjamin Franklin: In free governments the rulers are the servants, and the people their superiors and sovereigns. For the former, therefore, to return among the latter was not to degrade but to promote them. Thomas Jefferson: Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for Thomas Jefferson: Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution. Let us not James Madison: Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of Nor is it understood that we are NOT one government, we are two, of which each state has jurisdiction above the federal within its territories except in the VERY few (and in writing) areas where they overlap, and then the US Constitution is supreme not the people who serve within our governments. The 1783 Treaty of Paris, which ended our war with Great Britain, held that each state was a sovereign nation. As such, each feared giving up its rights to a powerful central government. St John Tucker: The congress of the United States possesses no power to regulate, or interfere with the domestic concerns, or police of any state: it belongs not to them to establish any rules respecting the rights of property; nor will the constitution permit any prohibition of arms to the people; (Remember that no one else who serves within our governments can make any law/regulation/code/treaty/etc that is lawfully binding on the American people except for those who serve within the House of Representatives and the Senate themselves. They cannot assign it to anyone else. They must create it, and make it law in all of its boundaries themselves.) Justice Sandra Day OConnor: The Constitution does not protect the sovereignty of States for the Mack and Printz v. United States: The Framers rejected the concept of a central government that would act upon and through the States, and instead designed a system in which the State and Federal Governments would exercise concurrent authority over the people. The Federal Governments power would be augmented immeasurably and impermissibly if it were able to impress into its service and at no cost to itself the police officers of the 50 States Federal control of state officers would also have an effect upon the separation and equilibration of powers between the three branches of the Federal Government itself. Michael LeMieux says well what our US Constitution does here: The Constitution has very little to do with the American citizen. It was written to establish a Federal Government and to place the boundaries by which that government would operate. The constitution was never designed to provide or enumerate the rights of the citizens but to restrain the federal government from meddling in state and ultimately citizen affairs. That we are NOT suppose to have political parties (Democrats and Republicans) because they are the door to foreign and moneyed intervention, and then takeover. George Washington: However factions [political parties] may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion. Note to readers: Ted R. Weiland, aka Kingdom Ambassador, has developed another gospel and invites you to accept it. His gospel directs you to join his campaign to abolish the U.S. Constitution. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true gospel. Ignore Weiland and cleave unto the truth. Bearer of false witness is a steady habit with you. Proverbs 23.17 Let not thine heart envy sinners: but be thou in the fear of Yahweah all the day long. Falsely accusing another is also a no-no, Bob. Do you have access to a mirror of reflection ? NO, thought not I suggest you eat some humble pie and speak less and think more. Oh come on. Put some brain power into your responses. You know you threw the first stone. At least make your retorts witty or at least amusing. Ill have to report you to Ted R. Weiland for representing him so poorly. The Constitution is already forked. Your government is doing a great job of abolishing that right before your eyes The Constitution has been suffering attacks by liberals/progressives/socialists/CPUSA for decades. The fight to preserve its ability to protect our liberty and freedom will never be over. Good stuff my friend! These are all good arguments, but our Justice System truly are run by morons. I think all the prosecutors care about is keeping score. They must have an almost 100% conviction score or their careers will be damaged. That is a big reason they want to plead the case. This is still a conviction. I was charged in 2006 with DUI. I was guilty. I took the plea. I had to pay a $2,000 fine, pay court costs, go to and pay for an alcohol diversion program (10 weeks), pay for the Parole Officer for me to meet with and tell my progress with the sentence,10 day in jail (tent city here in Arizona), pay for and attend a one night meeting with MADD, loss of drivers license, pay for an attorney (which was totally useless), install an ignition interlock device ($200 for installation/$70 a month for reading. All for pleading. I could not have done any worse with a jury trial. When I went before the Judge, there was a Latin immigrant who saw the judge right before me. He had stabbed someone with a knife and all he got was a $50 fine. He actually hurt someone, although I was stupid to have done so, no one was hurt by my actions. I honestly have no respect for anyone involved with the Justice System. Is this fair? I is just a scam, another tax upon the people. Far out, brother! Your story reads almost exactly like mine! I was paying for my crime 2 years later for a first offence. I had a prior though, lol. I was caught exceeding the speed limit by 15 klm/h FIFTEEN YEARS EARLIER! Its a forking disgrace. And, that criminal record stands for all time. Weigh that up with what our government leaders do on a daily basis! Its no wonder im ready to start a revolution. Its forking time! This system is equity of commerce. Not of a Republic. In Australia every one is an inch away from breaking the law when ever they leave their homes. The number of laws and rules we are now living under is no way to live AT ALL! We are being watched doing EVERYTHING. And people think this is ok! One of our politicians said, If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. Its about time we all stand and tell these coward leaners they are no longer needed. 