Re: Elder Kennedy ordered to tesify to Grand Jury (if you can (fwd) [a couple of other comments]

Forwarded message:

> 				ARTICLE V. 
>  
> 	No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise 
> infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, 
> except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, 
> when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any 
> person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of 
> life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness 
> against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without 
> due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, 
> without just compensation. 

It's important to read that part about depriving life, liberty, or property
within the context of forced medication, deprivation of social contacts,
etc. before a trial has even been held. A person is innocent until proven
guilty, and that means you can deprive him of geographic freedom if they
can't pay bail. Outside of that any interruption or loss of income is the
responsibility of the state to recompensate. It should also guarantee that if
found innocent the incident won't have an impact on current or future career
and life opportunities. They're sworn to protect life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness with their lives if necessary. That's why their called
PUBLIC SERVANTS.

Note that property may be taken by the state through due process, private
property (my home, personal savings, papers, etc.) can't be siezed for *ANY*
reason without just compensation. Businesses and shared accounts (such as
401k's perhaps) are fair game.

I break the law and you want to take my house?

Fucking get your check book out. Otherwise it's theft and that's a crime in
principle and practice. This means that *EVERY* confiscation law on the
books yesterday, today, or tomorrow are completely illegal if they allow
confiscation of private property in relation to crime.

If the LEA's, courts, politicians, etc. really, really, really believe that
the people of this country want to allow them to confiscate their property
in relation to criminal activity then they should parent an amendment to
that effect immediately. I'll tell you now, it ain't got a hope in hell.
And when the reckoning day comes on this particular issue it's going to be a
doozie.

> 				ARTICLE VI. 
>  
> 	In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right 
> to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and 
> district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district 
> have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the 
> nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses 
> against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his 
> favor, and to have Assistance of Counsel for his defence. 

Note that the right to have *ASSISTANCE* of counsel is guaranteed. This
means the state must provide you an attorney to assist in the correct
process documentation *EVEN* if you represent yourself. Because it uses the
term assistance there can be no implied power of attorney without direct and
unconstrained and willing complicity by the accussed.


    ____________________________________________________________________
 
            Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want
            the right answers.

                                        Scully (X-Files)

       The Armadillo Group       ,::////;::-.          James Choate
       Austin, Tx               /:'///// ``::>/|/      ravage@ssz.com
       www.ssz.com            .',  ||||    `/( e\      512-451-7087
                           -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
    --------------------------------------------------------------------

In <199811120514.XAA27764@einstein.ssz.com>, on 11/11/98 
   at 11:14 PM, Jim Choate <ravage@einstein.ssz.com> said:

>I break the law and you want to take my house?

>Fucking get your check book out. Otherwise it's theft and that's a crime
>in principle and practice. This means that *EVERY* confiscation law on
>the books yesterday, today, or tomorrow are completely illegal if they
>allow confiscation of private property in relation to crime.

>If the LEA's, courts, politicians, etc. really, really, really believe
>that the people of this country want to allow them to confiscate their
>property in relation to criminal activity then they should parent an
>amendment to that effect immediately. I'll tell you now, it ain't got a
>hope in hell. And when the reckoning day comes on this particular issue
>it's going to be a doozie.

The sheeple don't care. The government has waged an effective propaganda
campagne and only BadPeople (tm) get their property confiscated. Just like
only BadPeople (tm) drink and drive, or consume unapproved plants, or
smoke, or think BadThoughts (tm), ...ect.

The sheeple have shown time and time again that they are unworthy of
freedom and democracy that so many better men have fought and died for.
There will not be any popular outcry against this or any other
infringements by the sheeple, they are much more interested in worrying
about cum stains on party dresses (or whatever the latest circus has to
offer).

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.openpgp.net
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 5.0 at: http://www.openpgp.net/pgp.html
---------------------------------------------------------------