OPEN LETTER TO DAME LOUISE CASEY:

  • 0 Replies
  • 934 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

Offline the leveller

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • 4115
  • +75/-0
OPEN LETTER TO DAME LOUISE CASEY:
« on: January 25, 2017, 07:59:35 PM »
OPEN LETTER TO DAME LOUISE CASEY:
Dear Dame Casey,
 
It is not the job of the state or politicians (including Dame Louise Casey) to decide the moral, social, secular, or religious mores of the persons who comprise the population. As long as individuals do not impinge upon the rights of others, within a definitive Democracy, demos-kratein; demokratia, the people rule: they are sovereign to decide their mores, laws and liberties for themselves through the Trial by Jury.
 
Dame Casey,
For explanation of the Constitutional Rule of Law which binds us all, you notwithstanding, see this brief extract from the Restoration Campaign Philosophy textbook, DEMOCRACY DEFINED: The Manifesto ISBN 978-1-902848-26-6.
 
TRIAL BY JURY WAS CONSTITUTIONALLY EMPLACED FOR THE PURPOSES OF:
A.) not only ascertaining guilt or innocence of the accused and where necessary for apportioning retribution, but also
 
B.) of transcendent importance, as a barrier to protect the vast mass of innocent citizenry from the crimes of arbitrary government, i.e., unjust laws, and from the corruption, prejudices and incompetence of fallible justices (judges). Trial by Jury enables the people to judge authoritatively what their liberties and laws are (explained below), so that the people retain all the liberties which they wish to enjoy.
HOW EQUAL JUSTICE IS DONE:
THE JUROR’S DUTIES IN TRIAL BY JURY.
Wherever Trial by Jury takes place, be it in the U.S., the U.K., Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and numerous other countries, it is definitive of Trial by Jury that, after swearing to do justice, to convict the guilty and acquit the innocent, in finding their Verdict:
The Jurors Judge:
~on the justice of the law, and annul, by pronouncing the Not Guilty Verdict, any law or act of enforcement which is deemed unfair or unjust according to the juror’s conscience (i.e., sense of fairness, right and wrong);
~in addition to the facts, and
~on the admissibility of evidence (evidence not being pre-selected or screened-out by government or judge and/or prosecutor).
Jurors Must Judge:
~that the accused acted with malice aforethought, i.e., mens rea, a premeditated malicious motive, if the jury is to find guilt (‘guilt’ is a characteristic inherent or absent in motives and actions: it cannot be ascribed by legislation*);
~on the nature and gravity of the alleged offence; and, where guilt is unanimously found,
~on mitigating circumstances if any (provocation; temptation; incitation); and
~set the sentence (with regard to its being fit and just).
*There is neither moral justice for punishing nor political necessity (i.e., deterrent value) where there was no mens rea. (In the case of one person injuring another innocently or accidentally, the civil law suit and the Trial by Jury award appropriate compensation for damages.)
For jurors not to do the above, or for someone other than the jurors to make any such decisions, is another process: call it “trial-by-someone-else” if you will, or “trial-by-the-judge with a false ‘jury’ watching”―but this travesty cannot be defined as a Trial BY JURY.
 
THERE IS ONLY ONE TRIAL BY JURY.
It is mere falsehood to call a procedure “trial by jury” if the accused and any of the matters related to the case under judgement are tried by someone other than the jury. There is no process and no meaning to the words Trial by Jury other than that which the words themselves prescribe.
Lord Justice Denman: “Every jury in the land is tampered with and falsely instructed by the judge when it is told it must take or accept as the law that which has been given to them, or that they must bring in a certain verdict, or that they can decide only the facts of the case.”
See p.6, DEMOCRACY DEFINED:The Manifesto. Regina v. C.J. O’Connel, 1884. Emphasis added.
 
Yours sincerely,
Kenn d'Oudney.
www.democracydefined.org
 
DEAR FRIENDS,
PLEASE SIGN AND FORWARD THIS PETITION!
See the link just below...
----- Original Message -----
From: CitizenGO
To: Kenn
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2017 5:11 PM
Subject: Thank you for signing my petition

Hello, Kenn,
Thank you for signing my petition, "British Values Oath - Oppressive, Intolerant and Authoritarian"
Can you help this petition win by asking your friends to sign too? It's easy to share with your friends on Facebook or twitter - http://www.citizengo.org/en/fm/40280-british-values-oath-oppressive-intolerant-and-authoritarian?m=5.
There's also a sample email below that you can forward to your friends.
Thanks again -- together we're making change happen,
 
_______________
Message to forward to your friends:
Hello,
I just signed the petition "British Values Oath - Oppressive, Intolerant and Authoritarian" on CitizenGO.
It's important. Will you sign it too? Here's the link:
http://www.citizengo.org/en/fm/40280-british-values-oath-oppressive-intolerant-and-authoritarian?tc=ty&tcid=31740782
thanks,
Kenn


 
Share this topic...
In a forum
(BBCode)
In a site/blog
(HTML)


SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk