by Mark A. Adams JD/MBA
We no longer have any right to a jury trial. Those rights have been stolen by power mad, greedy, fascist scum.
Most of you are saying, "No way! My teachers told me that we did, and I read the Constitution once, and it said that we had a right to a jury trial, too! Plus, I didn't see anyone on TV, any expert or any reform organization say anything about not having a right to a jury trial anymore. You must be wrong!"
Others are saying, "Big deal. Judges are wise honest old people who almost always do the right thing like in all of those court shows on TV! I wouldn't want to have to waste my time on jury duty. Judges should make all of the decisions. It is so much more efficient."
Although most are clueless, those in power are well aware that Thomas Jefferson said, "If a Nation expects to be ignorant and free., it expects what never was and never will be.... If we are to guard against ignorance and remain free, it is the responsibility of every American to be informed."
So naturally, the rulers want to make sure that the public remains ignorant of the fundamental rights to control the government which were supposed to be secured by the Constitution. Their efforts to maintain widespread ignorance of these rights has been very effective. As a result, ironically, many people complain about government abuses, but then call for the passage of laws which clearly violate the Constitution, undermine our fundamental rights, and ignore the need to seek an amendment if anyone wants to change the Constitution while remaining a government based on the rule of law.
Unfortunately, the rulers are so afraid that the people might figure out that they have stolen the fundamental rights which we were supposed to have to control them that they have an army of enforcers and propagandists ready to attack people who undertake any meaningful action to defend those rights or raise awareness about them. Has anyone else noticed that? If not, do you really enjoy having all that sand in your eyes?
Now, court decisions are determined by a judge based upon who has the most influence over him. Naturally, in proceedings in which the state is not a party, this is the better connected attorney who "loses" more money to the judge on the golf course, and when the state is a party, it is the state unless you have a well connected attorney who "loses" a lot of money to the judge or has a picture of the judge with a _______ in his _______ (Fill in the blanks yourself). I'm sure that some people, such as fools and shills, will think that my claim that judges are for sale is unbelievable. However, I've been involved in many cases in which the judge ignored the law and the facts to rule in favor of a party in spite of the fact that the decision was against both the law and the facts. In fact, I was involved in one case in which the opposing party repeatedly boasted that his attorneys were connected, had the judge in their pocket and would bury my client, and they did in spite of the law and the facts and the efforts to get the authorities who are supposed to make sure that judges don't break the law to take action.
Furthermore, Alexander Hamilton, a Founder, Framer and attorney, said that trial by jury is the best way to protect our rights and secure justice because there is much more time and opportunity to improperly influence judges than there is to improperly influence a jury summoned to hear a case.
Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry and a lot of the other attorneys who were involved in founding our country thought that they had ended the tyranny of the judiciary by requiring jury trials in all proceedings; however, in 1840, the U.S. Supreme Court claimed that those Framers didn't know what they were talking about and decided that no jury trials were necessary in "equitable" proceedings, like probate, family law and mortgage foreclosure. We all know that the judges never ignore the law in those proceedings, right?
Our right to jury trials has also been eliminated in all other civil proceedings by the grant of the power of summary judgment to the judiciary without anyone bothering to amend the Constitution. The Constitution says that it is the supreme law of the land, but the judges say that their rules rule, summary judgment granted or denied depending on who has the judge's favor.
The fascist scum even had the audacity to claim that you do not have a right to a jury trial when charged with a crime unless it is a felony even though both Article III, § 2 and the Sixth Amendment clearly provide that the trial of all crimes shall be by jury. See Lewis v U.S. 518 U.S. 322 (1996). By the way, this decision is supported by the so-called conservative or strict constructionist judges who found the word "serious" written in invisible ink in both clauses in the Constitution.
Please note that I'm not saying that trampling the Constitution is right. I'm saying that the powers that be are doing it, and if more people don't get a clue and demand that our rights to control the government are restored, then things will continue to go downhill. If you want to know what those rights are, read Why does the government ignore our wishes? and don't miss my speech.
Mark A. Adams JD/MBA