Common Law Grand Jury Authority

COMMON LAW GRAND JURY AUTHORITY

Many Citations borrowed from:
http://www.nationallibertyalliance.org

• The Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That   to   secure   these   rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, -- That   whenever   any   Form   of   Government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter, or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”... 
• U.S. Constitution Article VI, Title. Supremacy; clause Three: “This Constitution shall be the Supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”  
• U.S. Constitution Fifth Amendment: “No person shall be held to answer for a capitol or otherwise infamous crime except on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury ,”... 
• U.S. Constitution Seventh Amendment: “In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law."
• U.S. Constitution Ninth Amendment: “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the People .”
• U.S. Constitution Tenth Amendment: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
• In the Supreme Court case of United States v. Williams, 112 S.Ct. 1735, 504 U.S. 36, 118 L.Ed.2d 352 (1992 ), Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, confirmed that the American grand jury is neither part of the judicial, executive nor legislative branches of government, but instead belongs to the people. It is in effect a fourth branch of government "governed" and administered to directly by and on behalf of the American people, and its authority emanates from the Bill of Rights. 
• JUSTICE ANTONIN SCALIA WENT ON TO SAY : (in U.S v. Williams) “The grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the branches described in the first three Articles. It is a constitutional fixture in its own right ”. United States v. Chanen, 549 F.2d 1306, 1312 (CA9 1977) (quoting Nixon v. Sirica, 159 U.S.App. D.C. 58, 70, n. 54, 487 F.2d 700, 712, n. 54 (1973)), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 825, 98 S.Ct. 72, 54 L.Ed.2d 83 (1977).; United States v. John H. Williams, Jr.; 112 S.Ct. 1735; 504 U.S. 36; 118 L.Ed.2d 352; No. 90-1972. 
• "All laws, rules and practices which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void" [Marbury v. Madison, 5th US (2 Cranch) 137, 180] 
• “There can be no limitation on the power of the people of the United States (of America). By their authority the State Constitutions were made and by their authority the Constitution for the United States (of America) was established…”  Hauenstein vs. Lynham (100 US 483). 
• “The United States Supreme Court declares that the “Sovereignty” remains with the “people” and resides with the “people”…Yick Wo vs. Hopkins and Woo Lee Hopkins (118 US 356). 
• “No action can be taken against a sovereign in the non-constitutional courts of either the United states or the state courts and any such action is considered the crime of Barratry.  Barratry is an offense at common law.”  State vs. Batson 17 S.E.2d 511. 512,513
• "Whenever people are well-informed they can be trusted with their own government” - Thomas Jefferson … 
• “The constitutions of most of our states assert that all power is inherent in the people ; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent” - Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Cartwright; June 5, 1824; 
• "Trust in the jury is, after all, one of the cornerstones of our entire criminal jurisprudence, and if that trust is without foundation we must reexamine a great deal more than just the nullification doctrine." - Judge David L. Bazelon
• "The Court of Appeals' rule would neither preserve nor enhance the traditional functioning of the grand jury that the "common law" of the Fifth Amendment demands” - 1990, U.S v. Williams
• "The grand jury is an institution separate from the courts, over whose functioning the courts do not preside, we think it clear that, as a general matter at least, no such supervisory judicial authority exists” - 1990, U.S v. Williams  
• JUSTICE ANTONIN SCALIA SAID : “In fact the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people”. Stirone v. United States, 361 U.S. 212, 218, 80 S.Ct. 270, 273, 4 L.Ed.2d 252 (1960); Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43, 61, 26 S.Ct. 370, 373, 50 L.Ed. 652 (1906); United States v. John H. Williams, Jr.; 112 S.Ct. 1735; 504 U.S. 36; 118 L.Ed.2d 352; No. 90-1972.
• JUSTICE ANTONIN SCALIA SAID : “The grand jury requires no authorization from its constituting court to initiate an investigation,” see Hale, supra, 201 U.S., at 59-60, 65, 26 S.Ct., at 373, 375, ).; United States v. John H. Williams, Jr.; 112 S.Ct. 1735; 504 U.S. 36; 118 L.Ed.2d 352; No. 90-1972. 
• “The grand jury's functional independence from the judicial branch is evident both in the scope of its power to investigate criminal wrongdoing, and in the manner in which that power is exercised. "Unlike [a] [c]ourt, whose jurisdiction is predicated upon a specific case or controversy, the grand jury 'can investigate merely on suspicion that the law is being violated, or even because it wants assurance that it is not.'" United States v. R. Enterprises, 498 U.S. ----, ---- , 111 S.Ct. 722, 726, 112 L.Ed.2d 795 (1991) (quoting United States v. Morton Salt Co., 338 U.S. 632, 642-643, 70 S.Ct. 357, 364, 94 L.Ed. 401 (1950)). Blair v. United States, 250 U.S. 273, 282, 39 S.Ct. 468, 471, 63 L.Ed. 979 (1919).; United States v. John H. Williams, Jr.; 112 S.Ct. 1735; 504 U.S. 36; 118 L.Ed.2d 352; No. 90-1972.
• Presentments are filed with the Supreme Court Chief Clerk and once filed cannot be removed, anyone interfering with an official proceeding commits a crime under US codes. 
• USC 18 §2076 - Clerk is to file: Whoever, being a clerk willfully refuses or neglects to make or forward any report, certificate, statement, or document as required by law, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. USC 18 §2071 - Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, documents filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court, shall be fined or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. 18 USC §1512b - Whoever knowingly uses intimidation, threatens, or corruptly persuades another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to - (1) influence, delay, or prevent ... an official proceeding; (2) cause or induceany person to - (a) withhold ... a document, or other object, from an official proceeding; (b) alter, destroy, mutilate, or conceal an official proceeding; … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.
• "The jury has a unalienable right to judge both the law as well as the fact in controversy." John Jay, 1st Chief Justice United States Supreme Court, 1789.  "The jury has the right to determine both the law and the facts." Samuel Chase, U.S. Supreme Court Justice 1796, Signer of the unanimous Declaration  
• "The jury has the power to bring a verdict in the teeth of both law and fact." Oliver Wendell Holmes, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1902.
• The Magna Carta §52 Title. DUTY OF THE GRAND JURY; “If anyone’s unalienable rights have been violated, or removed, without a legal sentence of their (“We the People” Supreme Rulers), named Peers, from their lands, home, liberties or lawful right, “We the People” Supreme Rulers [the twenty-five] shall straightway restore them. And if a dispute shall arise concerning this matter it shall be settled according to the judgment of “We the People” Supreme Rulers, [the twenty-five] Grand Jurors, the sureties of the peace.” 06/15/1215 
• The Magna Carta §61 Title. CONSTITUTION OF A COMMON LAW GRAND JURY “We The People Supreme Rulers” having discord, which has arisen between (”One People” Supreme Ruler) Us, and our civil servants, (judges, justices, attorneys, clerks, elected civil and military officers, Sheriff, US Marshal Services, congressman, congresswoman, state representatives) wishing to establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, and secure the blessings of liberty to enjoy forever in its entirety. “We The People Supreme Rulers” may select at Our pleasure [twenty-five] “People” Supreme Rulers from the Sovereignty, (not elected public officials civil servants) who ought, with all their strength, to observe, maintain; and cause to be observed, the peace and unalienable rights. If any of our civil servants shall have transgressed against any of theOne People” Supreme Ruler in any respect and they shall ask (“We The People Supreme Rulers”) Us, to cause that error to be amended without delay, or shall have broken some one of the articles of peace or security, and their transgression shall have been shown to [four Jurors] of the aforesaid twenty-five “People” Supreme Rulers from the Sovereignty, and if those [four Jurors] are unable to settle the transgression they shall come to the [twenty-five], “People” Supreme Rulers from the Sovereignty, showing to the Grand Jury the error which shall be enforced by the law of the land.” 06/15/1215
• Quote From George Washington:  “The power under the Constitution will always be in the people. It is entrusted for certain defined purposes, and for a certain limited period, to representatives of their own choosing; and whenever it is executed contrary to their interest, or not agreeable to their wishes, their servants can, and undoubtedly will, be recalled.” 

Solution #9: Children's Best Interests Survey

When the People don't object to corrupt interpretations of child interests with one voice, we collectively agree with it. When the People aren't the voice of our children, government money is. Please help our children have a voice by completing and sharing this survey.

After taking the survey, see:

Childrens Best Interests Survey as of February 6, 2014

Print this off and take it to your local state representative. It's like bringing everyone who took the survey with you. This is compelling, as the "children's best interests" is supposed to be the #1 tenant in family law. Ask your representative if they're interested in the public interests when it comes to child interests. If they raise questions about the objectivity of the survey, or that it's not compelling if it's not representative of their local constituency tell them that's a fair assesment, and then say. "No one can properly represent public interests without being interested in polling the public."

This shows the fundamental flaw in "children's best interest" rubber-stamping, and the contrast between the People's interpretation and governments. What will your representative do to address this?

Reform Solution #3: Class action against judges who are appointed rather than elected. A breach of our constitutional guarantee of a republican form of government.

Do-Something Strategies for Public Integrity and Family Law Reform

Litigation:

• Class action to summon federal and local grand juries to investigate and indict government criminal activity that prosecutors won't address. Also, to restore meaningful public access to grand juries.
• Class action against illegitimate CPS workers who fail to issue and file oaths of office.
• Class action against judges who are appointed rather than elected. A breach of our constitutional guarantee of a republican form of government.
• Class action against unconstitutional judicial delegation of "absolute" immunity by "quasi-judicial" means to officials void of "absolute" judicial qualifications and capacities.
• Class action against unconstitutional, ruber-stamped, involuntary temporary terminations of parental rights without due process or claim of wrongdoing by guardian ad litem assignments. A conflict of interests and deprivation of right to fair and competent counsel.
• Class action lawsuit against perverse financial incentives without transparency, accountability, and responsible oversight.
• Ongoing general class action plaintiff candidate registry/pool. 
• Public integrity related legal template repository. (Litigation forms, initiatives, community letters, criminal affidavits of probable cause, etc.

Community/Advocacy Organization Strategies:

• Children's Best Interests Survey.
• RateMy[Government worker/Attorney/CommunityLeader/AdvocacyOrganization].com
• Private community leader registry.
• Grass-roots internet talk radio and video news media revolution.
• Unionizing public corruption victims, and networking with social media integrated with robust civic empowerment tools.
• Group-rate/Groupon DIY legal workshops.
• Group-rate/Groupon private investigations/government audits.

Legislation/Citizen Initiatives:

• Live streaming/podcasting of all public government meetings. Like/dislike buttons and public comments.
• Randomly selected, continuously convened civilian grand jury panels. Selected by outgoing convened panels.
• Privatization of all government oversight committees.
• Secure government logins to statute and legislative bill websites for access to Like/dislike buttons on every statute and bill. Tampering constitutes breach of the peace.
• Claims of public integrity violations given to a prosecutor, mandate either referral to a grand jury, prosecution of the accused for cause given, or prosecution of the claimant for false reporting.
• Upon probable cause of criminal misconduct/public corruption, unless the referred to and heard by a grand jury, no prosecuting official may fail to prosecute.
• All judges must be elected.
• Eliminate judicial delegation of "absolute" immunity by "quasi-judicial" means to officials void of "absolute" judicial qualifications and capacities.
• Eliminate abuses of jurisdiction/process such as application of the civil process in lieu of any applicable criminal process, where the avoided jurisdiction/process affords greater rights and standards. (I.E. criminal standard for adjudicating allegations of child abuse only applicable allegations
• Burden of proving due effort to identify the public  for drafting legislation, and minimum polling standards for lawmakers.
• Make "Constitutional attorneys" a minimum standard rather than a rare breed.
• Make legal self representation and  constitutional law studies an educational core curriculum course with higher priority than math.
• Government incentives/tax breaks for attorneys who publish original legal document templates. Especially when related to civil rights.
• Civilian walk-in micro-grants for public integrity victim advocacy/public interest polling. Community-based minimum standards and proof of bonafide service.

Reform Solution #2: Object to Government Funding for Deprivation of Rights Programs Using False Government Authority.

Recognize that Human Services CPS Workers Have no Government Authority without Issuing an Oath of Office.

NOTICE AND DEMAND FOR CPS OATH OF OFFICE COMPLIANCE

Reform Solution #1: Grand Juries

Problem: Make no mistake that the root of our problem, and our cause for reform is: Systemic failures and color of law patterns and practices in CPS and family law, motivated by perverse financial/other incentives and motivations to traffic children, maintain conflict, prolong litigation, or otherwise criminally deprive rights.

Solutuon: Investigation and prosecution of government criminality by grand juries.

1. There are two kinds of grand juries: Status quo, and common law. Both are viable options.
2. It is a conflict of interest for government officials, having largely presumed disgretion and immunity, to investigate or prosecute other government officials for any form of government criminality.
3. The Constitution gives power to grand juries to address this conflict, and allows them to act as the People's checks and balances for government criminality. 
4. Grand juries are composed of citizens just like standard (petite) juries are. However, as opposed to petite juries, their role is to investigate and commence prosecution for criminal activity. They are essentially to a prosecutor what a petite jury is to a judge.
5. Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, TITLE III. THE GRAND JURY, THE INDICTMENT, AND THE INFORMATION, Rule 6: "(a) Summoning a Grand Jury. (1) In General. When the public interest so requires, the court must order that one or more grand juries be summoned. A grand jury must have 16 to 23 members, and the court must order that enough legally qualified persons be summoned to meet this requirement."
6. The Declaration of Independence is ratified precident, and sound legal advice. It provides that 56 signing individuals may represent and assert public interest without any bar certification, in a manner that is not subject to judicial review, particularly when the Declarants claim public interest against a long train of government abuse and refusals to assent to laws. It is, however, subject to review in the jurisdiction of the People, which is vested in juries, whether petite or grand.
7. Once we have 56 Declarants who sign a declaration asserting that the Public interest requires grand juries to be summoned to investigate and prosecute CPS and family law criminality, a judge must so summon without question, and only the grand jury may make a finding against the asserted public interest.
8. Judicial interference would be an abuse of jurisdiction, an unlawful usurpation of political power, and a constitutional violation that would amount to an impeachable offense.
9. "Vox pupuli vox dia", or "the voice of the People is the voice of god" is a widely upheld legal tenant.
10. If grand juries are properly summoned to investigate CPS and family law criminality, real people, without conflict, will begin investigating and indicting CPS and family law criminality.
11. If grand juries are unblocked, and begin investigating and indicting CPS and family law criminality, the perverse motivations will be stifled by the threat of prosecution. Thus uprooting the problem, thus establishing meaningful reform.
12. When you know of government criminality that goes unchecked, how much tolerance do you feel for it? Does it seem to go against all the tenants of natural human liberties, and the right to equal treatment under the law? Does it make you wish you could write your own laws to fix the problem? What new laws would make sense if you already have such rights, and the very problem at issue is government refusal to asent to the law?
13. Are you a person? If so, you are a member of the People. You don't have to wish for someone else to write or remove laws before you can lobby for them. All political power is inherent to the people for their equal protection and benefit. The People are the most powerful branch of government. You can, for example, write a law, and get people to vote on the law. It's called a citizen's initiative. If the People vote for your law, Lawmakers, your representatives, are guilty of high crimes if they defy the law and the voice of the People. Vox pupuli vox dia.
14. So what law should come forward to unblock grand juries? It should be one that's significant. One hat works more like a medical clinic than a bandaid. It should support and be supported by the constitution. It should be a simple, clear expression of common sense. So common that it virtually already exists in the hearts and minds of People. So common in fact, that it pretty much is an existing law, and just isn't being used. A law so common that doesn't even require an initiative.
15. The law that should come forward is common law. Law made common by deeply rooted constitutional foundations and existing by ratification and precedent. Law that simply needs to be picked up and used.
16. Common law grand juries are a constitutional prerogative of the People. "a constitutional fixture in its own right" (see citation below.) No other branch of government can properly pick them up and use them for us.
17. This is pretty much how it has to be done. We can't just beg a gang of thugs to stop terrifying our neighborhood. We can't just take a few of the thugs to their leaders and petition for relief. We have to band the neighborhood together. We have to keep watch, and demand that enforcement authorities do their jobs. We can't accept any other offer. As legally and tactfully as possible, we can give good government every opportunity to do the right thing, and if they don't, we can impose good government on them without a violent revolution. Perhaps that's why the founders of our country gave us the power of grand juries. So we can have safer, smaller revolutions when things get as out of hand as they are.

AUTHORITY AND SOVEREIGNTY OF COMMON LAW GRAND JURIES

PLAN FOR CLASS ACTION PETITIONING OF GRAND JURIES

1. The term "class action" is being used losely, as this will not necessarily involve, at least initially, civil court litigation. This is optionally free in that any legal advise or representation is up to the class, at the prerogative of class members individually, or within particular jurisdictions/divisions. You may seek independent legal advise, or join with with other class members in seeking group advise. Consider that this is a criminal action, and presenting probable cause on criminality to a grand jury is similar to making a criminal complaint to law enforcement or prosecutors.
2. Regardless of whether you prefer to pursue a status quo or common law grand jury, a summoned grand jury will need to be presented with criminal probable cause or reasonable suspicionto proceed. You may present your cause to investigate/prosecute however you like. You may wish to use and perhaps modify this PRESENTMENT OF PROBABLE CAUSE TO GRAND JURY which is an unprecedented template, and not qualified legal advise, as the sources of legal advise used to create it will not be disclosed to protect the corruptly controlled bar certifications of those who provided it. This means you must consider Matthew J. Falkner as the only source of it. Matthew is not an attorney, claims no such such capacity, and gives no warranty express or implied. 
3. For status quo grand jury demands, we're removing government disgretion to interpret public interest by demanding jointly with 56 or more class members per jurisdiction. Citing precedent in the Declaration of Independence as mentioned above. On a general level, anyone may sign the simple petition here. Which is simply a vote of public interest.
4. Class action demands by state/county for status quo grand juries. Depending on state law, this may be to a grand jury panel, a court, a prosecutor, or if necessary, as a citizen's initiative. Statutes may require individual presentments, but they can be presented individually as being joined in a class effort. Presentments should apply to state defined crimes.
5. Federal Presentments. The process for presenting to a federal grand jury is more simple. We simply bring our presentments to a U.S. attorney, With a request to submit to a grand jury. A U.S. attorney is required by law to take all such requests to the grand jury. The request need not be brought to the U.S. attorney by a government entity. Presentments should apply to federal crimes.
6. Common Law Grand Juries: Institute common law grand juries on the precedented, constitutional, and exclusive authority of the People. (More to come)

Other Info:

US DOJ Calls for Reports of Outrageous Custody Outcomes - Public interest required the Department of Justice to call for claims of outrageous custody outcomes. It would logically follow that the same public interest required an impartial grand jury to investigate. Such a situation is precisely what the Constitution and rule 6 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure assign to them. It's the only authority that can investigate without conflicting interests.

Grand Juries Corruptly Obstructed - Example of what's currently not working. Recording of U.S. Attorney's Office Secretary Obstructing Justice on Report of Grand Jury Panel Official Misconduct.