-Caveat Lector- <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/"> </A> -Cui Bono?- .............................................................. >From the New Paradigms Project [Not Necessarily Endorsed]: Conspiracy Shopping Cart: http://a-albionic.com/shopping.html From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: SPOTLIGHT EMAIL NEWSLETTER #38 Date: Sunday, March 12, 2000 9:03 PM SPOTLIGHT EMAIL NEWSLETTER #38 Please visit the controversial LIBERTY LIBRARY BOOKSTORE ONLINE! The store now has the full Liberty Library catalog and a shopping cart system! http://www.spotlight.org/store/commerce.cgi? IN THIS ISSUE: Rebellion In The Jury Clinton's Oil Crisis Judges Could Be Held Accountable Rebellion In The Jury Some say jury nullification is the most practical way to stop the juggernaut police state. By Tom Stahl The Washington Post published a front page story entitled, �In Jury Rooms, a Form of Civil Protest Grows,� last year. According to the Post article, jurors are not always following judges� instructions to the letter. The article recounted that sometimes in jury trials, when those facts which the judge chooses to allow into evidence indicate that the defendant broke the law, jurors look at the facts quite differently from the way the judge instructed them to. The jurors do not say, �On the basis of these facts the defendant is guilty.� Instead, the jurors say, �On the basis of these facts the law is wrong,� and they vote to acquit. Or, they may vote to acquit because they believe that the law is being unjustly applied, or because some government conduct in the case has been so egregious that they cannot reward it with a conviction. In short, a passion for justice invades the jury room. The jurors begin judging the law and the government, as well as the facts, and they render their verdict according to conscience. This is called jury nullification. Dr. Jack Kevorkian, recently convicted, was acquitted several times in the past, despite his admission of the government�s facts, of assisting the suicide of terminally ill patients who wanted to die. Those acquittals were probably due to jury nullification. And Kevorkian might have been acquitted again if the trial judge had allowed him to present his evidence, testimony of the deceased�s relatives, to the jury. A corollary of jury nullification is greater latitude for the jury to hear all of the evidence. The Post took a dim view of this and suggested that jury nullification is an aberration, a kind of unintended and un wanted side-effect of our constitutional system of letting juries decide cases. But the Post couldn�t be more wrong. Far from being an unintended side-effect, jury nullification is explicitly authorized in the constitutions of 24 states. All Criminal cases The constitutions of Maryland, In diana, Oregon and Georgia currently have provisions guaranteeing the right of jurors to �judge� or �determine� the law in �all criminal cases.� Article 23 of Maryland�s Constitution states: In the trial of all criminal cases, the Jury shall be the Judges of Law, as well as of fact, except that the Court may pass upon the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a conviction. The right of trial by Jury of all issues of fact in civil proceedings in the several Courts of Law in this State, where the amount in controversy exceeds the sum of five thousand dollars, shall be inviolably preserved. Art. 1, Sec. 19, of Indiana�s Constitu tion says: In all criminal cases whatever, the jury shall have the right to determine the law and the facts. Oregon�s Constitution, Art. 1, Sec. 16, states: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines im posed. Cruel and unusual punishments shall not be inflicted, but all penalties shall be proportioned to the offense. In all criminal cases whatever, the jury shall have the right to determine the law, and the facts under the direction of the Court as to the law, and the right of new trial, as in civil cases. Art. 1, Sec. 1 of Georgia�s Constitution says: The right to trial by jury shall remain inviolate, except that the court shall render judgment without the verdict of a jury in all civil cases where no issuable defense is filed and where a jury is not demanded in writing by either party. In criminal cases, the defendant shall have a public and speedy trial by an impartial jury; and the jury shall be judges of the law and the facts. These constitutional jury nullification provisions endure despite decades of hostile judicial interpretation. LIBEL CASES Twenty other states currently include jury nullification provisions in their constitutions under their sections on freedom of speech, specifically with respect to libel cases. These provisions, listed below, typically state: . . . . in all indictments for libel, the jury shall have the right to determine the law and the facts under the direction of the court. But New Jersey, New York, South Carolina, Utah and Wisconsin omit the phrase �under the direction of the court.� South Carolina states: In all indictments or prosecutions for libel, the truth of the alleged libel may be given in evidence, and the jury shall be the judges of the law and facts. Alabama (Article I, Sec. 12); Col orado (Article II, Sec. 10); Connecticut (Article First, Sec. 6); Delaware (Article I, Sec. 5); Kentucky (Bill of Rights, Sec. 9); Maine (Article I, Sec, 4); Mississippi (Article 3, Sec. 13); Missouri (Article I, Sec. 8); Montana (Article II, Sec. 7); New Jersey (Article I, Sec. 6); New York (Article I, Sec. 8); North Dakota (Article I, Sec. 4); Pennsylvania (Article I, Sec. 7); South Carolina (Article I, Sec. 16); South Dakota (Article VI, Sec. 5); Tennessee (Article I, Sec. 19); Texas (Article 1, Sec. 8); Utah (Article I, Sec. 15); Wisconsin (Article I, Sec. 3); Wyoming (Article 1, Sec. 20). Delaware, Kentucky, North Dakota, Pennsylvania and Texas add the phrase �as in other cases.� Tennessee adds the phrase �as in other criminal cases.� These phrases suggest that the jury has a right to determine the law in more than just libel cases. The Tennessee Constitution, Art. I, Sec. 19, says: . . . and in all indictments for libel, the jury shall have a right to determine the law and the facts, under the direction of the court, as in other criminal cases. The phrase �under the direction of the court,� omitted by five states, provides for the trial judge to give directions, like road directions which the jury may or may not choose to follow, to assist the jury in its deliberations. Our forefathers did not intend by this phrase for the trial judge to infringe in any way upon the sole discretion of the jury in rendering its verdict. Although later courts have held otherwise, the Tennessee Supreme Court in Nelson v. State, 2 Swan 482 (1852), described the proper roles of the judge and jury as follows: The judge is a witness who testifies as to what the law is, and the jury is free to accept or reject his testimony like any other. The Maine Constitution affirms these roles in its section on libel: . . . and in all indictments for libels, the jury, after having received the direction of the court, shall have a right to determine, at their discretion, the law and the fact. In addition, 40 state constitutions, like the Washington state Constitution in Article I, Section 1, declare that �All political power is inherent in the people,� or words to similar effect. And 34 state constitutions expound on the principle of all political power being inherent in the people by saying that �the people . . . have at all times . . . a right to alter, reform, or abolish their government in such manner as they may think proper,� or words to similar effect. For example, the Pennsylvania Consti tution declares that: All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety and happiness. For the advancement of these ends they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think proper. If the people have all power, and have at all times a right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think proper, then they certainly have the right of jury nullification, which is tantamount to altering or reforming their government when they come together on juries to decide cases. A single nullification verdict against a particular law may or may not alter or reform the government, but thousands of such verdicts certainly do. Witness the decisive role of jury nullification in establishing freedom of speech and press in the American Colonies, defeating the Fugitive Slave Act and ending alcohol prohibition. Of special note is the right of re vo lu tion in the New Hampshire Constitution. Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind. If the people have the ultimate right of revolution to protect their liberties, then they certainly also have the lesser included and more gentle right of jury nullification to protect their liberties. It should also be noted that New Hamp shire declares an unalienable �Right of Conscience�: Among the natural rights, some are, in their very nature unalienable, because no equivalent can be given or received for them. Of this kind are the Rights of Conscience. If the right of conscience is unalienable, then it can not be taken away from people when they enter the courthouse door to serve on juries. The people have an inherent and unalienable right to vote their conscience when rendering jury verdicts. There is no doubt that jury nullification was one of the rights and powers that the people were exercising in 1791 when the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution was adopted. As legal historian Lawrence Friedman has written: In American legal theory, jury power was enormous, and subject to few controls. There was a maxim of law that the jury was judge both of law and of fact in criminal cases. This idea was particularly strong in the first Revolutionary generation when memories of royal justice were fresh. Jury nullification is therefore one of the �rights . . . retained by the people� in the Ninth Amendment. And it is one of the �powers . . . reserved . . . to the people� in the Tenth Amendment. Jury nullification is decentralization of political power. It is the people�s most important veto in our constitutional system. The jury vote is the only time the people ever vote on the application of a real law in real life. All other votes are for hypotheticals. Clinton's Oil Crisis The Clinton administration�s failed foreign and domestic policy has led to the crude oil fiasco this year. EXCLUSIVE TO THE SPOTLIGHT By Charles P. Page With retail gasoline, diesel fuel and heating oil prices at an all-time high, the economy shows cracks. The American economy, driven by the confidence and buying habits of the public, is now and will continue to reflect the will of an alarmed and wary consumer. Americans are patient to a fault, but when crude oil prices took another jump from $30 to $32 per barrel, they saw retail gasoline dealers immediately post prices of $1.599 or more for regular unleaded. As March began, John Q. Public rebelled. The gasoline-consuming public, known as �4-wheelers� by those �18-wheelers� who surrounded the White House with their trucks, are also generally aware and very sympathetic to the �New England ers� who are being gouged to pay $2 or more per gallon for heating oil, just to survive the 1999-2000 winter heating season. A normally patient retail consumer woke up and is now establishing guilt and will find ways to punish those who allowed this crude oil fiasco 2000 to occur. Blame can readily be pinned on a failed foreign and domestic policy in which the Clinton administration and Congress have looked at election-year politics, while ignoring the effect of rapid-rising crude oil prices for the past 12 months. For example, in southwest Florida, surrounded by water, ports and hoping to keep oil rigs at bay in the Gulf, a gallon of unleaded regular was $ .899 in February 1999. Now, at $1.599, the price increase is $ .70 per gallon or an astronomical 78 percent in the past 12 months. The Energy Information Adminis tration�s February Report predicted even higher gasoline prices. It may be part of the problem, not a part of the solution. An abundance of historical records exist, which show that crude oil prices, adjusted to constant dollars, have averaged close to $19 per barrel for almost a century. It is at $32 per barrel or $13 above the historical average or normal. But that is not the real �killer increase� that is devastating the driving public in America. Here are the facts: � In February 1999, crude oil was at only $9 per barrel (with gasoline running $ .899 per gallon). This month crude oil is at $32, a $23 per barrel increase of 256 percent (with gasoline running $1.599). The increase alone is shameful and greedy�$4 per barrel above the historical $19. Someone is getting rich and John and Jane Q. Public get fleeced. � In the past 30 years, the American economy has been fractured three times by crude oil prices above the normal $19 or less, on which it operates well. Gasoline lines of 1973, still fresh in some minds, resulted when the Saudis and others �starved� the United States by deliberately limiting exports. Then, prior to and during the Persian Gulf War (1990-91), the price of crude oil soared to $40 per barrel, yet gasoline prices were held at $1.30 or less per gallon. Ob viously, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and other producers were being �protected� by U.S. armed forces. So it was in their self-interest to cooperate. � This is the third time the OPEC clan has again made decisions that are counter to American economic stability. That will not be forgotten by the U.S. populace. If asked to defend Kuwait, Saudi Arabia or any OPEC member again, would anyone expect the hard-pressed American consumer to say �yes�? Expect a resounding �no.� � The Clinton administration and Congress waited too late. Last-minute feeble acts by the overburdened energy secretary to increase crude production, will take too long, perhaps a year. � The solution to the �killer increase� in crude oil pricing is simply to roll it back quickly. Our American consumer, both �John and Jane,� can demand that solution in several ways. Buy as little gasoline as possible, don�t hoard or fill-up, hunt for the lowest retail price and bombard Washington at every level with your dissatisfaction. Take matters into your own hands. Save yourself and the American economy you created. Judges Could Be Held Accountable A ballot initiative could mean trouble for judges in the Golden State. By James P. Tucker Jr. A judicial watchdog group has initiated a move to amend the California constitution to include a provision to hold judges accountable for their wrongdoing. The �Judicial Accountability Initiative Law� (JAIL) is a proposed amendment to the California constitution that would establish three statewide grand juries to hear complaints about judges. The grand juries would have the power to fine judges and, for third offenses, remove them from the bench. They could also indict judges on criminal charges. The North Hollywood-based �Jail 4 Judges,� a judicial watchdog group, is gathering signatures to get the initiative on the ballot. The initiative grew out of citizens� inability to get justice in spite of evidence accumulated implicating judges in scandals. JAIL has documented evidence of several judges involved in taking bribes and other scandals, according to spokesman David Silva. Ironically, the copied-checks evidence became available because of a controversial ruling by the Supreme Court in the 1970s. When citizens objected to the Internal Revenue Service being allowed to snoop into their bank accounts, the court ruled that checks are �public documents� because they have to be seen by at least one �third-party� bank employee. Thus, JAIL was able to �force the banks to come up with the checks,� Silva said. While they were ostensibly for �flowers and coffee� and such, they amounted to �millions of dollars a year,� he said. �When we bring it to the attention of officials, they turn a blind eye,� Silva said. The same happens when they tell the media, he said, although the proposed amendment has had coverage in The Los Angeles Daily Journal and The Metropolitan News-Enterprise. �Our goal is to first take California by storm, then the other states by fall-out,� says its web site, www.jail4judges.org. �What begins in California sweeps the nation. By pressure of the other states, we shall create and call for federal judicial accountability everywhere.� At present, the targets are all state and local judges, Silva said. But there is obvious corruption among federal jud ges, who will become targets as the Cal i fornia initiative moves nation-wide. **************************************************************************** Subscribe to THE SPOTLIGHT! Only $59.00 for 1 year or $99.00 for 2 years. Every week, get the important stories that the popular media either miss... or ignore. For around $1.00 per issue, THE SPOTLIGHT is a steal! Don't wait any longer. Make sure that you never miss another issue. Subscribe now! To subscribe online, visit our SECURE server at www.spotlight.org. You can also mail your subscription to THE SPOTLIGHT, 300 Independence Ave. S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003. OR CALL 1-800-522-6292 **************************************************************************** If you wish to unsubscribe from this newsletter, send an email to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" (without the quotes) and type in the body of the email "unsubscribe spotlist" (also without the quotes). Shop for Cars On-Line: http://a-albionic.com/ads/srch.html Forwarded for info and discussion from the New Paradigms Discussion List, not necessarily endorsed by: *********************************** Lloyd Miller, Research Director for A-albionic Research (POB 20273, Ferndale, MI 48220), a ruling class/conspiracy research resource for the entire political-ideological spectrum. Quarterly journal, book sales, rare/out-of-print searches, New Paradigms Discussion List, Weekly Up-date Lists & E-text Archive of research, intelligence, catalogs, & resources. To Discuss Ideas: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://msen.com/~lloyd/ For Ordering Info & Free Catalog: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://a-albionic.com/formaddress.html For Discussion List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] text in body: subscribe prj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> **FREE RARE BOOK SEARCH: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ** Explore Our Archive: <http://a-albionic.com/a-albionic.html> Every Diet Has Failed! What Can I do? Click Below to "Ask Dr. Kathleen"! http://www.radiantdiet.com/cgi-bin/slim/deliver.cgi?ask-1364 *********************************** <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soap-boxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
