Kirk Pendergrass: Common Law Due Process

Information learned in these common law lessons apply to not only Federal law but also STATE, & LOCAL law.  Our Constitution is supreme law of our land and all states have a state Constitution based on Supreme Constitution.  If we expect to have justice returned to our Republic of, by, and for We People then we must educate ourselves in our common lawful law and force our courts to comply to our Constitution or shut them down!

Our lawful common law of our land is EASY to understand. BAR ATTORNEY’s use ‘word-craft’ legalese to deceive, INTIMIDATE, and trick us into submission. It’s a perversion of our lawful common language and definitions.  Continue reading

LINK  Justice

Office of Public Affairs

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Thursday, July 25, 2019

Federal Government to Resume Capital Punishment After Nearly Two Decade Lapse

Attorney General William P. Barr Directs the Federal Bureau of Prisons to Adopt an Addendum to the Federal Execution Protocol and Schedule the Executions of Five Death-Row Inmates Convicted of Murdering Children

Attorney General William P. Barr has directed the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) to adopt a proposed Addendum to the Federal Execution Protocol—clearing the way for the federal government to resume capital punishment after a nearly two decade lapse, and bringing justice to victims of the most horrific crimes.  The Attorney General has further directed the Acting Director of the BOP, Hugh Hurwitz, to schedule the executions of five death-row inmates convicted of murdering, and in some cases torturing and raping, the most vulnerable in our society—children and the elderly.

“Congress has expressly authorized the death penalty through legislation adopted by the people’s representatives in both houses of Congress and signed by the President,” Attorney General Barr said.  “Under Administrations of both parties, the Department of Justice has sought the death penalty against the worst criminals, including these five murderers, each of whom was convicted by a jury of his peers after a full and fair proceeding.  The Justice Department upholds the rule of law—and we owe it to the victims and their families to carry forward the sentence imposed by our justice system.”  [emphasis mine]

The Federal Execution Protocol Addendum, which closely mirrors protocols utilized by several states, including currently Georgia, Missouri, and Texas, replaces the three-drug procedure previously used in federal executions with a single drug—pentobarbital.  Since 2010, 14 states have used pentobarbital in over 200 executions, and federal courts, including the Supreme Court, have repeatedly upheld the use of pentobarbital in executions as consistent with the Eighth Amendment.

Upon the Attorney General’s direction, Acting Director Hurwitz adopted the Addendum to the Federal Execution Protocol and, in accordance with 28 C.F.R. Part 26, scheduled executions for the following individuals:

  • Daniel Lewis Lee, a member of a white supremacist group, murdered a family of three, including an eight-year-old girl. After robbing and shooting the victims with a stun gun, Lee covered their heads with plastic bags, sealed the bags with duct tape, weighed down each victim with rocks, and threw the family of three into the Illinois bayou.  On May 4, 1999, a jury in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas found Lee guilty of numerous offenses, including three counts of murder in aid of racketeering, and he was sentenced to death.  Lee’s execution is scheduled to occur on Dec. 9, 2019.
  • Lezmond Mitchell stabbed to death a 63-year-old grandmother and forced her nine-year-old granddaughter to sit beside her lifeless body for a 30 to 40-mile drive. Mitchell then slit the girl’s throat twice, crushed her head with 20-pound rocks, and severed and buried both victims’ heads and hands.  On May 8, 2003, a jury in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona found Mitchell guilty of numerous offenses, including first degree murder, felony murder, and carjacking resulting in murder, and he was sentenced to death.  Mitchell’s execution is scheduled to occur on Dec. 11, 2019.
  • Wesley Ira Purkey violently raped and murdered a 16-year-old girl, and then dismembered, burned, and dumped the young girl’s body in a septic pond. He also was convicted in state court for using a claw hammer to bludgeon to death an 80-year-old woman who suffered from polio and walked with a cane.  On Nov. 5, 2003, a jury in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri found Purkey guilty of kidnapping a child resulting in the child’s death, and he was sentenced to death. Purkey’s execution is scheduled to occur on Dec. 13, 2019.
  • Alfred Bourgeois physically and emotionally tortured, sexually molested, and then beat to death his two-and-a-half-year-old daughter. On March 16, 2004, a jury in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas found Bourgeois guilty of multiple offenses, including murder, and he was sentenced to death.  Bourgeois’ execution is scheduled to occur on Jan. 13, 2020.
  • Dustin Lee Honken shot and killed five people—two men who planned to testify against him and a single, working mother and her ten-year-old and six-year-old daughters. On Oct. 14, 2004, a jury in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa found Honken guilty of numerous offenses, including five counts of murder during the course of a continuing criminal enterprise, and he was sentenced to death.  Honken’s execution is scheduled to occur on Jan. 15, 2020.

Each of these inmates has exhausted their appellate and post-conviction remedies, and currently no legal impediments prevent their executions, which will take place at U.S. Penitentiary Terre Haute, Indiana.  Additional executions will be scheduled at a later date.

Press Release Number: 
19-807
Updated July 25, 2019

 

 

Continue reading

JURY NULLIFICATION

YOU HAVE POWER IN THE JURY BOX
Jury Nullification is something you’re not told about but it is your RIGHT as jurors to implement. Of course the judges do not want you to know this because they get paid huge money for judgments processed through their courts. It is your duty to JUDGE THE LAW AT THE SAME TIME YOU ARE JUDGING THE DEFENDANT, and perhaps judge the law first if it is a constitutional law that left a “victim” in its wake. The state can NOT be the victim!

You have power in the JURY BOX…one of the ways to over-turn tyranny is in the JURY BOX… do not avoid jury duty..accept it and bring true justice to the people… do NOT listen to what the Judge INSTRUCTS you to do..just remember if there is “.no victim there is no crime” no matter what the facts say. That is the foundation of our Constitution and Bill of Rights…Please watch this very informative video on a layman’s guide to jury nullification.

“The last stand against tyranny takes place in the jury box. The legislative branch may pass unconstitutional laws and the judiciary branch may uphold them. However, the individual citizen can nullify any law via jury nullification. Learn your rights as a juror. Most likely, you will not be told about them in the courtroom!”

THE CITIZENS RULEBOOK – PDF    DOWNLAND, STUDY, AND SHARE 

 

 

Constitutional Common Law Court vs. Queen’s Admiralty Court

PEOPLE’S CONTITUTIONAL COMMON LAW COURT vs. ADMIRALTY QUEEN’S COURT

Below is a flurry of tweets I tweeted this morning -short bytes of truth and decided I would post them all here for those not on twitter or not following me to read.  They’ve brief for just a quick summary of what happened to our remedy for JUSTICE . 

Why do we continue to allow JUDGES to rule over us? Most commit more CRIMES than any of us.  We rebel against God’s Laws & we say ‘don’t judge me’ but then we bow before the ‘Black Robes’ as if they’re gods

Continue reading

Catholic Cardinals are Enemies of America

History in plain English … what happened to our Country listen and find out … it may not be what you think! This addresses the Jesuits but it also applies to the Islamic Jihadi’s -both are a ideology of CONQUEST not a religion but even if someone want to claim religion freedom it cannot be allowed in America because it is not compatible with our Constitution of, by, and for the people with LIBERTY and JUSTICE for ALL (equally).

H

2018 Amendments – Manual for Courts -Martial, US Law & Justice

Annex 1 and 2 (Manual for Courts-Martial)

2018 Amendments to the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States
LAW & JUSTICE.  LINK
Issued on: March 1, 2018
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including chapter 47 of title 10, United States Code (Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. 801-946), and in order to prescribe amendments to the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, prescribed by Executive Order 12473 of April 13, 1984, as amended, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Part II, Part III, and Part IV of the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, are amended as described in Annex 1, which is attached to and made a part of this order.

Sec. 2. The amendments in Annex 1 shall take effect on the date of this order, subject to the following:

(a) Nothing in Annex 1 shall be construed to make punishable any act done or omitted prior to the date of this order that was not punishable when done or omitted.

(b) Nothing in Annex 1 shall be construed to invalidate the prosecution of any offense committed before the date of this order. The maximum punishment for an offense committed before the date of this order shall not exceed the maximum punishment in effect at the time of the commission of such offense.

(c) Nothing in Annex 1 shall be construed to invalidate any nonjudicial punishment proceeding, restraint, investigation, referral of charges, trial in which arraignment occurred, or other action begun prior to the date of this order, and any such nonjudicial punishment proceeding, restraint, investigation, referral of charges, trial in which arraignment occurred, or other action shall proceed in the same manner and with the same effect as if the amendments in Annex 1 had not been prescribed. Continue reading

Constitutionally Guaranteed Right

Thursday, September 26, 2013 [original date]

Constitutionally Guaranteed Right Cannot Be Converted Into A Crime

Miller v. US (5th Circuit) 230 F. 2d. 486 (1956) “The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot thus be converted into a crime”
Miranda v. Arizona 384 US 436 (1966)
“Where rights are secured by the constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them.”
Hale v. Henkel 201 US 43 (1906)
“…There is a clear distinction…between an individual and a corporation…The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way…He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights. Upon the other hand, the corporation is a creature of the state…it’s powers are limited by law.”
Byars v. United States 273 US 28 (1927)
“…it is the duty of courts to be watchful for the constitutional rights of the citizen, and against any stealthy encroachment thereon.”
Marbury v. Madison (1 Cranch 170) 5 US 137 (1803)
“…a legislative act contrary to the constitution is not law…an act of the legislature repugnant to the constitution is void.”
Norton v. Shelby County 118 US 425 (1886)
“An unconstitutional act is not law…it imposes no duty…it is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”
Mugler v. Kansas 123 US 623 (1887)
“The supreme court of the United States is, however, the final expositor and arbiter of all disputed questions touching the scope and meaning of that sacred instrument [the US Constitution], and its decisions thereon are binding upon all courts, both state and federal.”
Ex Parte Young 209 US 123 (1908)
“The Eleventh Amendment provides no shield for a state official confronted by a claim that he had deprived another of a federal right under the color of state law…when a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the federal constitution. And he is, in that case, stripped of his official or representative character, and is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The state has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States.”
Staub v. Baxley 355 US 313 (1958)
“…an ordinance which makes the peaceful enjoyment of freedoms which the constitution guarantees contingent upon the uncontrolled will of an official – as by requiring a permit or license which may be granted or withheld in the discretion of such official – is an unconstitutional censorship or prior restraint upon the enjoyment of those freedoms.”
United States v. Jackson 390 US 570 (1968)
“If a law has ‘no other purpose…’ than to chill the assertion of constitutional rights by penalizing those who choose to exercise them, then it [is] patently unconstitutional.”
Cohens v. Virginia (6 Wheaton) 19 US 264 (1821)
“A law cannot exceed the authority of the lawgiver. We have no more right to decline the exercise of jurisdiction which is given, than to usurp that which is not given. The one or the other would be treason to the constitution. The several state legislatures and judiciaries, are all bound by solemn obligation of an oath, to support the federal constitution;…willfully legislating in violation of that constitution…[is] guilty of perjury. [309]”
Post borrowed from:  http://www.titanians.org/right-to-travel-is-guaranteed/

RIGHT TO RESIST – 5/18/12 RULING

MICHIGAN SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS RIGHT TO RESIST POLICE MISCONDUCT

http://voiceofdetroit.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/To-Exist-is-to-Resist.jpg

 

LEAVE TO APPEAL

1835 Original Seal for MichiganThis e-mail is only going out to a few folks who might actually read it and share the information about the property rights cause with friends. Our judicial system is constitutionally bankrupt but we must use the system to expose it to everyone who wants to reestablish liberty in America. To have a case heard by the MI Supreme Court you must ask their permission, this process is called LEAVE TO APPEAL!  This LEAVE is not the actual BRIEF that must be filled if you are GRANTED permission to go before the MI Supreme Court it is just to present why you think this case is important and why they should hear your case. There is only about a 5% chance the case they will agree to hear the case and that is ok because this is a step in the overall exposure process. Below is just the introduction to the leave to appeal. Attached is the actual leave that was filed with the court. The attached also have both the opinion of the circuit and appeals courts. I have highlighted a couple statements in the Appeals Court OPINION I think you will find very interesting.

“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.” –Ronald Reagan

Greg

GROUNDS   (INTRODUCTION)   MCR 7.302 (B)
This Constitutional and statutory case against the State could affect hundreds of thousands of acres of private property and property owners within the exterior boundaries of Michigan. Plaintiff’s / Appellant’s sought declaratory relief to prevent defendant Department of Environment Quality (DEQ) from entering the property to inspect for wetlands and to require wetland permit with restriction if State so desired.
The state has properly admitted they do not have any Holds, Liens, Monetary, Proprietary or Contractual interests in the physical Property which the Plaintiffs / Appellants is the Assign and holds fee simple patent with no reservation, as evidenced by chain of title. However, the state and lower courts claims PA 451 of 1994, MCL 324.30301 gives jurisdiction over the person and police powers are granted to them by Art. IV § 52 of Michigan Constitution to enter, inspect, and require permits. The Court has also stated this kind of entry and requirement for a permit would not constitute a taking.
The term “property” embodies more than just physical, corporeal assets; it can include intangible entities, such as rights and interests.[1]   The patent 4829 Grants all rights, privileges, immunities, and appurtenances of whatsoever nature, to heirs and assigns forever.” In its precise legal sense, property is nothing more than a collection of rights;[2] indeed, “property,” in law, is not the material object itself, but is the right and interest or domination rightfully obtained over such object, with the unrestricted right to its use, enjoyment, and disposition.[3] The right to exclude others, as well as their property, is one of the most essential sticks in the bundle of rights that are commonly characterized as property. [4] Our case was brought to defend the right to exclude other from the property, to retain control of resources and defend the right not to have to enter into any permitting scheme (contract) with the state for rights already secured.
Art. I § 14 Jury trials “The right of trial by jury shall remain, but shall be waived in all civil cases unless demanded by one of the parties in the manner prescribed by law.  So far, this case has been bantered around on the states home court by trustees and actors of the state, and now needs to be addressed by a jury, the ones who authorize the state to exist, and the ones whose properties are at risk.
The Declaration of Independence clearly states:
“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,…”

LEAVE TO APPEAL SUPREME COURT searchable PDF DOCUMENT
Continue reading

BY CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED

BY CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED

Published on Mar 3, 2013

A Film by Steve: Bates which took almost 9 months to make covering the multiple aspects and uses of the term, ‘consent of the governed’. Something members of the World Freeman Society have revoked by Claim of Right.

Governments, Police all operate by consent. They require your consent by acquiescence to make rulings, statutes, acts and war & taxes, all by your consent. Some things are good, we like Peace Officers keeping us safe, but do not consent to their revenue making activities. There are many good reasons to have a government, but we must remember who we are and who ‘they’ are.

We are the Public and they are the Public Servants. And when they forget that, and start treating us like their property, it is our duty to inform others, help educate and hold accountable those whose actions do not reflect the mandate we as the people demand.

“Consent Of The Governed: The Freeman Movement Defined” is nearly 3 hours long, and covers a wide range of topics that effect and hinder our human freedom when dealing with civil SERVANTS who seek to claim authority over us, so be prepared to set aside some educational viewing time … however, I promise you, it will be time well spent.

Show Buttons
Hide Buttons
Scroll Up