Issues

Justice: The maintenance and administration of what is just, especially by the impartial adjustment of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or punishment; the quality of being just, impartial or fair; conformity to truth, fact or reason; to acquit in a way worthy of one’s powers; to treat fairly or adequately; the quality of performing according to law; the principal or ideal of just dealing or right action.

Equity: Justice according to natural (God’s) law; freedom from bias or favoritism; a body of legal and procedural doctrines that supplement, aid or override common and statute law and are designed to protect rights and enforce duties fixed by substantive law; or override a narrow, rigid system of law.
—Webster’s & Black’s Legal Dictionaries

WE STAND FOR A COMPLETE OVERHAUL OF THE GRAND JURY SYSTEM

In that vein we present an excerpt from David Van Dyke's latest book.

NINETY SEVEN CONVICTIONS TO THREE AQUITALS TELLS US SOMETHING!

Prosecutors and “SPECIAL AGENTS” of the I.R.S. think of themselves as honest people who are performing a hard task in order to protect the public. They view their jobs as very important. Many of them do work extremely hard long hours with a zealousness of passion.

 To them it is like a game. A conviction in court is a win. If a defendant walks, that is a loss. The object of the game is to win at any cost, which might require them to not discover the truth. Truth is not the quest of this game at all! The object is to achieve convictions, which scores points. The more points scored justifies bigger budgets, more jobs, and fatter payrolls! That in turn justifies more dollars in next years budget and verifies that they are doing their appointed jobs well.

How they get to a WIN is not important. The rules they play by do not restrict them from much. It is the WIN that counts and justifies everything they do. They do not take the time to stand back and say, “Hey, what I am doing here is wrong, deceitful and a sham.” They are taught all throughout law school that this is an adversarial system, and to win they must squash, subdue, master, or override the opposing side. They are not restricted in their methods of doing this. They are taught to go out and WIN.

As a result, prosecutors and attorneys soon lose sight of morality, or the golden rule principle taught by Jesus, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” That kind of principle just does not compute in an adversarial battle. To them all the indicted are guilty, so all should be convicted! The end justifies the means they must use. They are brainwashed themselves into believing that their adversaries, the defendants, are criminals who are guilty of heinous crimes against society and must be dealt with by any means.

OTHER COUNTRIES HAVE DEVELOPED BETTER LEGAL SYSTEMS

This is not the attitude of other countries who have long ago abandoned the jury system in many types of cases. Many today feel “the definition of a jury is “A group of citizens with average ignorance.” These other countries have experimented with other alternatives to using juries and have found better, quicker, less expensive methods that appear to provide a more accurate judicial system. No system on earth is perfect, of course.

In Scandinavia, a group of experts are chosen to inquire into the GUILT OR INNOCENCE of the accused. This replaced the shameful use of “GRAND JURIES” whose only grandeur is to do the bidding of the government prosecutors. The government can stand unopposed before the grand jury and spin a story of lies unparalleled in history, and receive an indictment on anyone. It is a one sided lynch mob, which is evidenced by the unanimous indictments coming from our GRAND JURIES.

A PROFESSIONAL PANEL OF CITIZENS EVALUATE ALL EVIDENCE

This panel is not paid government prosecutors, but informed, educated piers in the field of the case. Insurance experts would evaluate insurance fraud cases. Medical experts would look into medical fraud allegations. The best experts in the specialized field are solicited to help ferret out the facts, whether they be facts to support innocence, or facts to support guilt.

Both sides can bring facts, data, and evidence before this panel in a non—adversarial manner. This

panel does not care if the facts support innocence or guilt. They just want to cut through the chase and get to the bottom of the matter. What are the facts? They do not play games like our system in America does. The do not keep score. They are not trying to justify budgets. They want to know if there really was a crime committed. Was there really criminal intent? Were there deliberate acts committed knowingly, and were those acts criminal in nature?

These kinds of panels have unclogged many court rooms in these countries and sped up the justice system.  Such measures are rendering intelligent sensible justice for their citizens. Why are we, in the greatest nation on earth, stuck with Elizabethan justice spun from the dark ages? We are the greatest power upon the earth and bogged down in a legal system that is more archaic than the abacus. How refreshing an idea it is to introduce to our system the search for truth and innocence as well as guilt. 

WHY IS CHARGE SO HARD TO COME BY IN OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM?

We inherited our legal system from England, who was once a ruling power. We made some modifications, but it has really changed little since our founding fathers set up our Constitution. There are those who are entrenched deeply in this flawed system, and are amassing millions by the practice of their trade. They as
a group of professionals are now fully in change of our government. Every branch is loaded with attorneys, who outnumber ordinary citizens by three to one. We today are a government of attorneys, for attorneys, and by attorneys.

            These attorneys have little incentive to upset their apple cart, which is laying giant golden eggs for them daily.

It is refreshing to see that there are a few who are speaking out oh so softly for reform. Their voices are restrained by their strong association which has the power to sanction and discipline its own if they get too far out of line with the accepted philosophy.

David Van Dyke's Book will be on the Market soon 12/22/06

The News:
Congress Attempts to Kill the "Third-Party Threat" -
On February 1, congressional Democrats, led by Rep. Obey of Wisconsin, introduced a bill, H.R. 4694, that would end viable, third-party competition in races for the U.S. House of Representatives.

Our Take:
This is as evil as preventing felons from voting and both parties are guilty of supporting it.
ACT!
------------Write your Congressman opposing such legislation.

NEW READING

THE DEATH PENALTY ISSUE COVERED UP TO THE MINUTE