The Real History of Habeas Corpus

[darrenpollard1st]

Good vid mate, a few tips there I can use, thanks. Please keep them coming!

[bbburton]

I can just imagine a convict sitting in prison claiming his sovereignty and issuing his own writ of habeas corpus demanding the state court to produce his body and show the injury, then demanding that he be released for lack of jurisdiction. Yes, I see this as being quite effective. I can just see all of the convicts pouring out of prison tomorrow.

[spoonogsback]

One should aviod making a comment from a place of apparent ignorance for fear of being considered an idiot. By those arround you.

Please take some time to research for yourself before blundering in to something you do not comprehend.

[bbburton]

Where did you get your law degree? What prison have you been in or visited? How many habeas corpus clients have you represented? You listen to this as if the poster knows what he/she is talking about without doing your own research.

[mercen144]

One does not need a degree to know how to read history. Law is complicated and i do not see how if a convict is sitting in jail has the right to habeas corpus if he has already stated he understood the charges against him and plead guilty or not guilty. If the state does not present evidence, witness or the person or damaged party, or allow them a lawyer, then yes He, just like the right to be innocent until being proven guilty, must be let go. Anything else would be unjust and unamerican.

[bbburton]

A person being held longer than the sentence imposed by the court can use the writ to gain relief. The writ is not against the court pronouncing the sentence, rather against the person holding them; the jail or prison official. There are other basis for using the writ. Many have done so. Certainly anyone being held without trial can use the writ, with or without the assistance of a lawyer, demanding to be heard and, if justified, released. You get no argument from me there.

[earthicastar]

the key word here is "person" ... all contracts apply to "persons" now men and women.. deny "personification" and you are NOT a person, thus all 'presumed' contracts are VOID ab initio

[bbburton]

Huh?! A writ of habeas corpus is not a contract. Corporations are persons, yet you don't see corporations jailed. The writ names the warden of the prison, the sheriff of a county, the chief of police, and orders the body of the person being held to be brought before the court and give cause of why the person should not be released? So the 'key word' is not 'person', and has nothing to do with contract law.

[earthicastar]

I m not saying habeas corpus is a contract.? yes I see 'persons' jailed, therefore a corporation is jailed.. deny that you are a 'person' and the contract that was presumed to jail your body is void. Is your "body" a "person"?

[bbburton]

I am using 'person' in place of their name. Of course the writ does not say 'person' it names the individual being held. And no corporation has ever been put in prison, not ever. It has only been in recent times that corporate officers could be found criminally liable, and could be punished with incarceration. This distinction between 'body' and 'person' is of little consequence when the fact remains that it is a live body that is in prison. You can close your eyes, but the world doesn't go away

[mrchrismcphail]

2nd Amendment: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

[mercen144]

they shall not