Jury Obligation

Have you every considered the term Jury Duty? It's really more of an obligation, since duty requires an obligation to a person, and the State is an idea. How can an idea create an obligation?

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• Jury
• Duty
• FIJA
• fully
• informed
• jury
• association
• nullification
• government
• courts
• judge
• corrupt
• trial
• law
• DHS
• OTN
• Obscured
• Truth
• Network

[Spinducky]

Oops, for got to give props for this vid! Everyone should know their rights as a juror.

Sorry for the multiple postings (500 characters just ISN"T enough!) :)

[obscuredtruth]

Hey thanks for you comments Spinducky. There's a free state project member who was charged with jury tampering for saying "Jury nullification is your right". It's outrageous.

Did you watch The Court of Public Relations? If you liked this one, your going to love it. It's in my play list and my favorites.

[jls8777]

Jury nullification is dangerous. It can imprison those who deserve imprisonment, or it can set free those who deserve to be imprisoned. A juror's duty is to take the facts of the case and apply them to the laws of the state or jurisdiction in which the case takes place. Too many people in the jury attempt to play judge and apply their own interpretation of the laws instead of the actual interpretation as defined by the state Constitution or local ordinance or municipality

[obscuredtruth]

So when the laws said blacks, sorry, Niggers, are property, and they can be beaten, abused, sold, born into bondage, and subjugated; the Jury should only be looking at the law, because the law is always right in your twisted little mind isn't it?

Of course it always is "right" to the statist mentality. You think it's okay to violate one persons right for another's need to feel safe. Have you ever taken the worlds smallest political quiz?

[jls8777]

Laws are created by legislatures and are direct reflections of the people's wants and desires. Do you have understanding of our legal system? All Constitutions are living, breathing documents, changing with the times and reflecting current views and opinions. The Thirteenth Amendment outlawed slavery, so your "nigger" comment was pointless. Obviously the people realized that slavery was unacceptable and the 13th amendment shows that change in opinion. So, yes we need to follow the rule of law.

[obscuredtruth]

Your laws don't reflect my wants and desires. So that statement is false. See, democracy by nature, divides and puts people against one another. Liberty allows choice and freedom.

The living breathing document, that shows a very poor understanding of the principles the country was founded upon. Now, I don't argue the state run, state approved education system taught you that load of crap.

[obscuredtruth]

If a man can force me to show up at his office and force me to work for $12 a day regardless of my market value, and if I don't show up, he sends men with guns to kidnap me, is that servitude?

How sir do you explain jury "duty" (without relying on nationalistic bravado please)

Jury duty is slavery disguised as "civic duty", when in reality it's the blue light gang running trials with enslaved citizens who don't want to be there. Great plan. . .

[bluntZcuz]

how am i able to get away from jury duty....its soo wrong they can forcefully kill my time

[johnnyboypdq]

Most people do not know that the opportunity to serve on the jury is the Fourth branch of the peoples government. The educational system doesn't teach this any more, much less the actual government processes and branches. People can change the laws just by setting the innocent free from charges from bad laws! Most effective in the Grand Jury. You see this is the PEOPLES VOICE and opportunity to dispatch evil laws and greedy systems!

[animefan2k9]

just say your not a us citizen

[EasingDifficulties]

WE, as citizens, must serve on juries and acquit anyone being tried for breaking an unconstitutional law. Judge the law. Ignore the "judge's" instructions concerning guilt & innocence. As citizens we are the ultimate judges. Jury lawlessness/jury nullification must be practiced routinely.

[nitruswolf]

@bluntZcuz

It's easy, just say the person(s) are guilty regardless if you actually think it or not before the court date, they must get some one else as they can't have some one who will vote a specific way without listening to the evidence.

[nitruswolf]

I'm not a registered voter so I don't have to worry about being called to Jury Duty, but if I was a registered voter and they called me I'd just say the person is guilty and that is how I will vote regardless of the evidence, they can't legally have you on the Jury if you go in already with a bias like that, that is how you get out of Jury duty, no penalty or anything.

[ArrestAJudgeKit]

@bluntZcuz

It is really simple.  I just wrote a letter telling them if they were stupid enough to have me be on a jury I would gladly come down and educate the jury candidates how crooked the court was. I told them that I would have a captive audience and would jump at the opportunity to expose their crook they had for a judge. I was told not to show up. See really simple!

[basspig]

ANY compulsory "duty" as enforced at gunpoint by government, whether it be jury duty, military conscription, or paying taxes, is a form of slavery.

[bythedog]

If one has a 'trial' in an admiralty 'court', one has already entered the 'jurisdiction' of the 'court' and must follow their 'rules'. JN cannot be 'pushed' for, as the jury is informed by the 'judge' "You're job is to judge the facts in this case... I will give you the law!" He creates the 'law' from the bench.

I don't think you understand JN. How do you 'push' for it? JN has nothing to do with the judge or pro-se-cutor. If you're going to play ball on their 'court', you're playin their game.

[inertia186]

Push for jury nullification either way.

A) the courts lead us to believe these juries are required by the constitution, so B) nullification comes along with it. If they really are not constitutional juries, you're right (not A, thus not B). But how would it look for them openly to admit these are not constitutional courts?

If they ever post signs that say "this court is not authorized by the constitution" in order to get rid of nullification, they would really shoot themselves in the foot.