JURY DUTY - PART 3 - WHO ARE YOUR "PEERS?"

in #freedom7 years ago

Sadly, they are not who they used to be, or are supposed to be.


Recently, I was summoned for jury duty, which apparently lasts from December 2017 until March 2018. It was the first time in my life that I ever received a summons for jury duty, and it got me thinking a lot about what I've learned about jury duty in the past. I find it most unfortunate that so many things pertaining to jury duty are not even close to understood the way that they were originally meant to be.

CURRENT "UNDERSTANDING"

If you type "jury by peers" into the google search engine, the first sentence that you will find will be the following:

Now, however, "a jury of peers" more accurately means "a jury of fellow citizens."
source

Fellow citizens, huh? Does this mean random people off the street who have no idea about you, or anything else for that matter? The common understanding these days about what a "jury of peers" is basically falls into the beliefs that any random, "local" people fit the criteria.

The state puts together "a jury of peers" by first randomly selecting local citizens for the jury pool.
source

From these random citizens, the prosecution, defense and even the judge question each potential juror and eliminate any that they find fault with.

Interestingly enough, this doesn't really match up with the things that were once said pertaining to this particular part of the legal system.

ORIGINAL INTENT

Please consider these quotes from those who understood what "peers" originally meant. See if you can spot the difference.

What is meant by his peers? Those who reside near him, his neighbors, and who are well acquainted with his character and situation in life. -Patrick Henry

a jury of peers would, from their local situation, have an opportunity to form a judgement of the
CHARACTER of the person charged with the crime, and also to judge of the CREDIBILITY of
the witnesses. - John Holmes

Where jurors can be acquainted with the characters of the parties and the
witnesses — where the whole cause can be brought within their knowledge and view — I know
no mode of investigation equal to that by a trial by jury: they hear every thing that is alleged;
they not only hear the words, but they see and mark the features of the countenance; they can
judge of weight due to such testimony; and moreover, it is a cheap and expeditious manner of
distributing justice -James Wilson

Why do we love this trial by jury? Because it prevents that hand of oppression from cutting you off . . .
This gives me comfort — that, as long as I have existence, my neighbors will protect me. -Patrick Henry


Hopefully, you could spot the difference. Let it be fully understood that originally "peers" were people who actually knew the person on trial. They were acquainted not only with the defendant, but possibly even the witnesses or others involved. As actual neighbors, they could know the character and nature of the persons involved, and even notice things like changes in countenance and already know the credibility of those involved.

This is why I believe that I really have no business being selected for jury duty where I live. I don't know many of the locals, especially in the county that I live in, since I spend most of my "town time" in the next county over, which has a closer town.

ERODING THE FOUNDATION

The foundation of things like jury trials and trial by peers has been being eroded for a long time. Far too few understand what these things were originally intended to be, and an ignorant people is often used against one another, rather than being able to defend themselves from illegitimate and unconstitutional laws.

While I am not sure what the first few months of next year will hold for me as I have the potential to serve on a jury, just mentioning some of the things that I have in this series would be enough for me not to be selected. Simply put, informed jurors are not what the legal system is looking for. Otherwise, these things would be common knowledge.

I'm glad that being summoned at least got me thinking about these things once again, and even got me to share about them. If anyone really wants to learn a lot more, check out the Citizens Rule Book, Jury Handbook by clicking here. Thankfully someone was intelligent and nice enough to give me a printed copy many years ago.


PREVIOUS POSTS IN THIS SERIES:

As always, I'm @papa-pepper and here's the proof:


proof-of-duty



Until next time…

Don’t waste your time online, invest it with steemit.com


GIF provided by @orelmely


TO TRANSLATE POSTS VIA OPERATION TRANSLATION CLICK HERE

Sort:  

Another excellent article. The idea that people who know you should be eliminated as it is today, is insane. Who better to judge you and your countenance as evidence is being brought against you, than those who know you best. I have, in times past, stood up for a friend in an argument or dispute between parties, only to see a good friend say or act in a manner I knew to be deceptive or guilty. I would pull that person aside and ask, and if/when they lied to me, I knew it and would call them out on it, and demand that they be honest or I would. I know this goes against some of the modern day "bro codes", but honor and integrity must be something men have or society breaks down. I am glad to see you are not only learning so much about this part of the judicial system, but educating others on the subject. Ignorance is not bliss. Ignorance and the inability to cope with facts is the foundation for the snowflake generation coming out of college now. Keep up the good work.

I agree with your comment

Excellent comment! Thanks!

Nice post!

If it is anything like Jury Service in the UK there is an awful lot of sitting around and waiting. It's a good chance to tackle those tricky books you might have on your Kindle that you never found the time for.

The system from the get go is flawed.

First to be summons for anything is a breech of freedom... then as this article points out a peer is not a complete stranger as they are not at the same conscious or shared emotional level as is the "Defendant"... this is incorrect in the meaning of the word.

Next "Defendant", was it not supposed to be "Innocent" (not defending) until proven "Guilty"?

Jury Nullification, is the crucial key to fight the "Maritime Law" instead of "Natural Law" that is pinned against us.

Our court system is a FRAUD, same as the rest of our government unfortunatly. very scary.

it takes a village to be honest, just and sane.
cities drive you crazy.

LOL! Part of why I got out! Thanks man!

may be a question sir

What question?

may i your friend ?

Sure.

thanks where are you from my dear friend

It was an opportunity for you to learn new things and you did rise to the occasion. Congratulations! @papa-pepper

Yeah, a great refresher in things getting worse! Thanks @kevaton!

Oh wow, that is interesting as it could be some huge case or something. Too bad they won't let you make Steemit posts out of it, lol, now that would be cool!

LOL! What they don't know could incriminate me on the blockchain! LOL

Your post has been resteemed to my 2500 followers

Upvote this comment if you like this service

@papa-pepper This sounds like it could be a interesting/lengthy case...Good luck. Maybe there's a way out of it? ..

We will see what happens, nothing going on this month, but I may be selected sometime early next year.

Awesome post man! Way to be a thinker and a true guardian of freedom for the people! Preach on brother!

You've found yourself in a unique situation- where you have a very large audience and are able to educate them - This could be good!

Ah! Fascinating! I did not realize that this had changed so much.

I can't help but think of the way the New Testament and even some of the Old prescribes judging one another (stonings etc aside). It seems the original intent matched up fairly well with that point of view, while the modern version is anything but the Biblical way.

What an interesting post. I’ve always wanted to serve on a jury - although I’ve received notices it never got any farther than that. I have always believed in the good in people, and that you are innocent until proven guilty. I feel that in any circumstance I would be fair - but I never understood that a peer actually meant someone who knew the accused. If I had a preformed opinion of someone, if I liked or disliked them, I’m not sure if I could remain impartial. So this post is making me give thought to something that I was sure I understood. Very interesting.

This post has been ranked within the top 25 most undervalued posts in the first half of Dec 10. We estimate that this post is undervalued by $79.21 as compared to a scenario in which every voter had an equal say.

See the full rankings and details in The Daily Tribune: Dec 10 - Part I. You can also read about some of our methodology, data analysis and technical details in our initial post.

If you are the author and would prefer not to receive these comments, simply reply "Stop" to this comment.

Wow! I often wondered why the term peers was used, and now I know! Not only can I be entertained by you in a selfie contest, but I can be educated too! You are a good all-round kind of guy!

LOL! Thanks!

Yes, I had no idea that it was originally people who knew you!

Thanks for the post. This is one of the most important subjects for preserving our freedom. I hope to be called for jury duty because it could give me the chance to save a non-criminal criminal from having their life or property stolen. In my opinion their can be crime with out a victim and the victim cant be the States feeling. So if I were on jury and the state could not produce a victim or prove someone was damaged I would stand on jury nullification and vote not guilty. If you are not already familiar with jury nullification please read @pappa-peppers article above. Juries are our last stand against a criminal government. @Pappa-Pepper if you do get called Thank You for your service and I hope I have someone as well read as you if I am ever brought before the judge.

Informed people. Informed consent. I don't many people are informed today about many things. Governments, judicial systems and religious organizations as a whole, generally like to keep people uninformed. That way they have control over the masses.

And another great article....You become the teacher to many...

This is a DEEP rabbit hole. I believe though that the U.S. courts are operating under admiral (military) law which only affords us (the slaves) limited PRIVELEGES. I hope you watch the video, all the courts strange actions will make complete sense.


http://www.annavonreitz.com/noticetocongress.pdf