| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Manuel
Advanced Member
USA
762 Posts |
 Posted - 11 Apr 2004 : 16:26:17
|
In conclusion, the common law of yesterday has been "transferred" by "persons" of that rotten faction called attorneys. What was supposed to be common law, under The True Lawgiver, has been usurped by COMMON THIEVES which have thought to "turn" The Right which cannot be licensed nor regulated, and which only destroys:
Any denial of Counsel is an attempt to accomplish that which is
specifically prohibited by the U.S. and Florida Constitutions. The Right set down therein says nothing about only "court-approved counsel" and is in no way qualified.
The U.S. Supreme Court held, in Miller v Milwaukee, 272 U.S. 713,
715, that if a statute is part of an unlawful scheme to reach a prohibited result, " ... the statute must fail..." This was again upheld in McCallen v Massachusetts, 279 U.S. 620, 630. Legislators, neither Federal nor State, may restrict the Courts to "attorneys only" in order to effectively deny Counsel to any Defendant who evinces a desire to be represented or assisted by a "friend" in preference to an "attorney." What cannot be done by the front door cannot be lawfully done by way of the back door.
Legislators who pass laws do not have to be attorneys nor do those
who execute the law i.e., Sheriffs, Governors, Presidents, etc. Even the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court need not be licensed attorneys. To exclude the People from defending their "friends" in the Courts turns the said Courts into a playground for the legal establishment, and is a blatant violation of the Petitioner's Right to Counsel, due process of law, and equal protection under the law. Mr. Justice Brandeis said:
"Discrimination is the act of treating differently two persons
or things under like circumstances." Nat'l Life Ins Co. v
United States, 277 U.S. 508, 630.
As far back as 1886, the U.S. Supreme Court was concerned with
the unjust and illegal discriminations which were running rampant. The Court frowned upon law administered with an "unequal hand."
" ... so as practically to make unjust and illegal
discrimination between persons in similar circumstances material to their rights, the denial of equal justice is still within the
prohibition of the Constitution." Yick Wo v Hopkins, supra
Therefore, the Courts cannot be the exclusive territory of the legal
"elite corps" but must be open to all the Sovereign People alike--on an equal basis.
The Ninth and Tenth Amendments also prohibit the denial of Counsel
of choice. Nowhere has the Petitioner or his predecessors delegated such restrictive power to the United States or to the States, and if the Court will closely examine the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, it will find that the Right to Counsel of choice, such as the Petitioner herein claims, is also secured in the penumbra of these Amendments, particularly the Ninth, which is protected in the States (against "practice of law" statutes) by the Fourteenth Amendment. Roe v Wade, 41 L.W. 4213 (1973); Shapiro v U.S., 641, 394 US 618 (1966); Griswold v
Connecticut, 381 US 479 (1964).
In speaking of controlling Constitutional law as opposed to mere statute law, Chief Justice Marshall said:
"Those then, who controvert this principle, that the
Constitution is to be considered, in court as a paramount law, are reduced to the necessity of maintaining that courts must close their
eyes on the Constitution and see only the law."
And the Court concluded that:
"This doctrine would subvert the very foundation of all written
constitutions" Marbury v Madison, 5 US 137, 176
The United States Supreme Court also pointed out in this decision that in declaring what should be the supreme law of the land, the Constitution itself was first mentioned and " ... not the laws of the United States generally..."
The attorneys who sit in our State legislatures and our Congress have no right to pass laws which infringe or abolish our rights under the Constitution of the United States and such unconstitutional laws which purports to do so must be declared nul and void (Miranda v Arizona p Supra p. 491) and not binding upon the Courts.
|
|
|
FleeBabylon
Junior Member
USA
23 Posts |
Posted - 12 Apr 2004 : 14:01:51
|
Greetings, Manuel!
The Constitution embodies many of the principles of Gods' Law. Is it any surprise that men, both the governing as well as the governed, would despise and reject the precepts of it?
Our founders said, that if society lost it's moral compass and Christian orientation, the Constitution would be useless- and boy! were they right.
Every election, idiots stream to the polls by the millions, to vote for those who enslave them and who entitle themselves to the product of their labor.
It is no wonder that our legal system is ruled by crooks, because the very premise of modern politics is based on robbery and theft.
Our generation has watched this country descend into the depths of slavery- but most are too blind to see, as they sit in front of the TV for hours every night, hearing the politicians and the newscasters speak of 'freedom and democracy", and not realizing that every citizen must give 50% of their income to the government (which makes them nothing more than slaves) and that every industry and endeavor is subsidized, and thus there is no more free market.
And how many even care, because they percieve that they are getting some benefit from this system of things, and care not that that benefit comes from the extortion of their neighbor- much less do they realize the price that they themselves pay for such things.
It's almost like we are returning to the Dark Age.
" For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people: but the Lord shall arise upon thee, and his glory shall be seen upon thee." -Isa 60:2
Blessings,
Rich
"The right to life is the source of all rights--and the right to property is their only implementation. Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. The man who produces while others dispose of his product, is a slave."
-Ayn Rand |
 |
|
|
Manuel
Advanced Member
USA
762 Posts |
Posted - 12 Apr 2004 : 14:40:12
|
Greetings Rich, In His name Yahushuah,
There was a time when I thought to myself that by voting attorneys out of public office was a great idea... only many of the other lackeys running "for" public office are sorrounded by these same attorneys.
It is an insane situation people have taken to heart, which is a time, similar to the boiling caldera (pot) in yellowstone, where the scum coming out of the woodwork will finally come to its erruption.
We must not only observe the changes goings on under the surface of the earth, and on the heavens, but most importantly observe what is happening on the surface, which can be seen and heard through the naked eye and clear and "sound hearing."
His Grace and Light be upon you and your love ones,
I am,
Manuel
|
Edited by - Manuel on 12 Apr 2004 14:42:35 |
|
|
|
Manuel
Advanced Member
USA
762 Posts |
Posted - 15 Apr 2004 : 18:31:16
|
"Wherefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Woe to the bloody city, to the pot whose scum [is] therein, and whose scum is not gone out of it! bring it out piece by piece; let no lot fall upon it."
"Then set it empty upon the coals thereof, that the brass of it may be hot, and may burn, and [that] the filthiness of it may be molten in it, [that] the scum of it may be consumed."
"She hath wearied [herself] with lies, and her great scum went not forth out of her: her scum [shall be] in the fire." |
Edited by - Manuel on 15 Apr 2004 18:32:30 |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
COMMON THIEVES
