for RESTORATION and UNIVERSAL ADOPTION of CONSTITUTIONAL COMMON LAW TRIAL BY JURY.

http://www.democracydefined.org/
The Home Page of the Democracy Defined Educational Campaign

for RESTORATION and UNIVERSAL ADOPTION of
CONSTITUTIONAL COMMON LAW TRIAL BY JURY.

For as long as people concede to politicians (erroneously) the power to “make” our constitution, i.e., by passing “constitutional” laws, they continue to enslave themselves to the whim of MPs. According to our one and only real written Constitution, this concession is not only incorrect in terms of law, but it also comprises an abject act of treason capitulating the Sovereignty of We the People to those enemies who currently fill the seats of the House of Commons and claim “parliament is sovereign.”

It is likely that this concession by which they prostrate themselves to the misrule of MPs, has been induced by the premeditated miseducation of books and texts by (government’s) lawyers.

Definitively, constitutions bind governments permanently.

Equally definitively, no parliament can ‘make’ a “constitutional statute” because no statute binds a subsequent parliament.

In law, when a statute or treaty conflicts with the terms of a previous statute, the current statute simply overrules the former. All statutes without exception are liable to being overruled by parliament.

As shown by history, no statute can be ‘constitutional’.

Mike,

Here below you have provided an example typical of an earnest, well-meaning campaigner whose statements could have been written for him by someone wishing deliberately to stultify his arguments:

“OUR CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS WHICH POLITICIANS TREASONOUSLY IGNORE:

Alfred’s Law 893 (the ancient Common Law); The Magna Carta 1215; Statute of Northampton: High Treason and Misprison of Treason 1328; Statute of Praemunire 1353, 1377; Act of Supremacy 1559; Petition of Right 1628; The Grand Remonstrance 1641; Cestui Que Vie Act 1666; Declaration of Rights 1688; Bill of Rights 1689; Oath of Allegiance 1868;”

Only the first two laws mentioned are constitutional and permanently binding on the administration (‘government’):

1.) the collation of the People’s Common Law of the Land into the Dome-Book by King Alfred the Great, 871-899; and

2.) the 1215 Great Charter Constitution Magna Carta.

All the others mentioned are statutes which, along with any and all other statutes, are liable to be, and actually have been, actively overruled by parliament.

For example, witness the overruled wayward wishful opinions of some few judges, lords, and lawyers: the section forbidding transfer to foreign powers of British sovereignty in the 1689 Bill of Rights itself was overruled by parliament’s ratification of statutes and treaties which took Britain into the foreign jurisdiction of the European Union. This is the fact of life and law which you have yet to face up to. You cannot simply evade it by ‘claiming’ a statute is “constitutional.”

However, when you come to understand the Juror’s Constitutional Sovereignty over the law in the authentic Trial by Jury you will see that there was never a need to rely on the Bill of Rights or any other statute to try to show ‘treason’ in the act of joining the EU!

MPs’ treason is more effectively (and solely) established by knowledge of our permanent world-respected 1215 Great Charter Constitution. For to subject the British population to the jurisdiction of foreign courts and laws fatally breaches (treason) the Constitutional Sovereignty of the Juror to judge and decide all causes. There is NO Trial by Jury permitted by the corpus juris of the EU repugnant ‘Treaty-Constitution’; only the despot’s and statists’ trial-by-government-judge instead.

See excerpt from DEMOCRACY DEFINED: The Manifesto ISBN 978-1-902848-26-6.

Treason (cont.) THE PRINCIPLE OF UNANIMITY.

The Principle of Unanimity was understood, and definitively and constitutionally established by King Alfred the Great in the following way:

King Alfred had Justice (judge) Cadwine hanged because Cadwine had a man named Hackwy put to death by hanging, without the unanimity of the jury of twelve men. In this case, three jurors pronounced the Not Guilty verdict against nine. Cadwine removed the three and selected three others who would also pronounce ‘guilt’.

Similarly, King Alfred had Justice Frebern hanged, because Frebern hanged a man called Harpin, when the jurors were still in doubt as to their verdict. Alfred established that when there is a doubt, it is in the interests of all people that justice should save rather than condemn.

See “The Mirror of Justices,” compiled and published by Andrew Horne in Old French. The Mirror was written within a century after Magna Carta. It contains an account of Alfred’s acts and judgements, thought to have been originally composed by him.

Also see Chapter Six, Vol. 2, ‘Works,’ by Justice James Wilson, co-author of the U.S. Constitution.

UNDERSTANDING SOVEREIGNTY THROUGH  ANNULMENT BY JURY.

Magna Carta 1215 had (re-)installed Judicium Pariumfor all time,” the Common Law’s mechanism by which the Sovereignty of the People is both theoretically and pragmatically established.

That is to say, the famous Articles of Common Law in the 1215 Great Charter Constitution recognised the natural and legal Sovereignty of the People. This mechanism, Judicium Parium, which underpins and defines democracy sine qua non*, is the Common Law Trial by Jury.

*Hellenic Greece of the Constitution of government by Trial by Jury received from the Athenians the defining epithet, demokratia, Democracy.

See etymology, history and signification in Chapter One of DEMOCRACY DEFINED: The Manifesto.

According to legem terræ* constitutional common law, it is the jurors’ duty in Trial by Jury to judge the justice of the law and every act of enforcement and acquit any persons accused under an arbitrary, unjust or apocryphal statute, regulation or prosecution. This is the procedure of Annulment by Jury (1).

1 It is sometimes referred to in a linguistically incompetent self-contradiction in terms as ‘jury nullification’.

*terræ is pronounced terry, the ‘æ’ as in Cæsar, seize.
Terræ is Latin for “of the land.” Legem is the accusative Latin form; lex terræ is the synonymous nominative form. Legem Terræ, the Law of the Land, categorically excludes all statutes, laws and regulations made by government, and judges’ precedents (case law; stare decisis). See Articles of Common Law and the meaning of the terms Common Law and The Law of the Land in ‘Legal Definitions Unalterable at Common Law,’ in Chapter Three of The Manifesto. (There is no relation to the much later invention of autocratic, militaristic ‘maritime law’ which is sometimes referred to as ‘the law of the sea’.)

THE JUROR’S DUTY.

Consider Harlan F. Stone, U.S. Chief Justice 1941-1946, on the Juror’s Duty in the authentic Trial by Jury, as follows:

If a juror feels that the statute involved in any criminal offence is unfair, or that it infringes upon the defendant’s natural God-given unalienable or Constitutional rights, then it is his duty to affirm that the offending statute is really no law at all and that the violation of it is no crime at all, for no one is bound to obey an unjust law.

That juror must vote Not Guilty regardless of the pressures or abuses that may be heaped on him by any or all members of the jury with whom he may in good conscience disagree. He is voting on the justice of the law according to his own conscience and convictions and not someone else’s. The law itself is on trial quite as much as the case which is to be decided.”

U.S. Chief Justice Harlan F. Stone; Harvard Law Review. See Chapter One, The Manifesto. (Emphases added.)

TRIAL BY JURY WAS CONSTITUTIONALLY EMPLACED FOR THE PURPOSES OF:

A.)

not only ascertaining guilt or innocence of the accused and where necessary for apportioning retribution, but also

B.) of transcendent importance, as a barrier to protect the vast mass of innocent citizenry from the crimes of arbitrary government, i.e., unjust laws, and from the corruption, prejudices and incompetence of fallible justices (judges). Trial by Jury enables the people to judge authoritatively what their liberties and laws are (explained below), so that the people retain all the liberties which they wish to enjoy.

 

All societies govern (rule) through their justice system. Free people and nations govern themselves through their Trial by Jury (proper noun; capitalised). The 1215 Great Charter Constitution Magna Carta ordained that, through Judicium Parium (Common Law Trial by Jury), the power to punish be removed from government and justices (judges); viz. proofs in Articles 20, 21 and 39. The judicial duty and power to punish and set sentences are restored “in perpetuity” to the Jurors who are the judges in every cause (lawsuit) civil, criminal and fiscal.

Government justices may moderate sentences but not increase them; see that function explained in Chapter Four of The Manifesto.

In Common Law Trial by Jury, a defendant may only be convicted if the jury is unanimous in its judgement; i.e., its verdict and sentence. A ‘majority’ is not ‘a jury’. Hence, according to Common Law Trial by Jury there are no ‘majority verdicts’.

There are other ineluctable reasons as to why Common Law requires Unanimity to pronounce ‘guilt’. See Chapter Three of The Manifesto.

Unjust laws and acts of their enforcement are crimes per se; such ‘laws’ require juries’ annulment. Those responsible for unjust laws and prosecutions require to be tried by jury for their Crimes against the People*.

*Cf. Crime against Humanity; the Nuremberg Precedent, etc.

Equal Justice for All depends absolutely upon the honouring of the sovereignty of every single juror to judge the law, on admissibility of evidence, facts, motive, the nature and gravity of the offence, mitigating circumstances, and decide the verdict and sentence*.

*It also depends on supplemental Common Law parameters, such as Random Selection (by lot) of Jurors, etc.

The British People have perpetual sovereignty over the law through the Constitutional Trial by Jury and any activity which attenuates or attempts to attenuate the sovereignty of the Juror—such as joining the EU and submitting causes to foreign laws and courts—is High Treason and may incur the death penalty.

Indeed, those parliamentarians and courts (judges) who claim “sovereignty” for parliament need reminding of the fate prescribed by King Alfred for judges Cadwine and Frebern who also undermined the People’s Sovereignty expressed through the Juror’s Powers, Procedures, Rights and Duty in Trial by Jury.

 

Share

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *