Constitution Ruled Inadmissable as Evidence

Judge upholds government motion to redact defense exhibit the Citizens Rule Book

by Don Harkins

In a court document dated February 18, 1997, U.S. Attorneys Katrina Pflaumer, Susan Dohrmann and Gene Porter filed a motion in Western District of Washington U.S. District Court calling for the "Government’s redaction of defense exhibit F14, the Citizens Rule Book Jury Handbook."
The motion to have the Citizens Rule Book removed as evidence (which had been presented by John Pitner, et al, who were on trial for "militia activities,") came after the judge and the federal attorneys had censored the defense exhibit by removing some of the pages of the handbook in a way so that the jury would not know that the evidence had been tampered with.
The government’s reason for wanting the Citizens Rule Book deemed inadmissible as evidence: Because it contains quotes from our framers and founders which clearly explain the intent of the jury system and the rights and responsibilities of jurors. The federal attorneys maintain that, "...the jury needs ‘no jury handbook’ because the only appropriate and legal guidance are in the Court’s instructions which the jury is required to follow."
It is the position of the federal government and judges that jurors must follow judges’ instructions only. It was the position of our Founding Fathers and Supreme Court justices that jurists were to follow their conscience in the full knowledge of their rights and responsibilities as jurors.
One position attempts to empower government entities to control the outcomes of trials by juries of one’s peers. The other position empowers citizens to use their own minds to determine the outcomes of trials by juries of one’s peers.
Is there any reason to question why the government does not want fully informed jurors to sit in judgment of their peers? Is there any reason to question why the government has found it important to have the Citizens Rule Book disallowed as evidence?
Can you see now why there has been a growing movement to discard the jury system as dysfunctional? Can you see now that the jury system has been sabotaged by judges (the state) so that people will be fooled into discarding it all by themselves?
As a juror, as the jury system was intended by the Founding Fathers, you are more powerful than the president. That is why the state wants you to demand that the jury system be replaced with something "better."

Excerpts from the Citizens Rule Book: Jury Duty

The purpose of this article is to revive, as Jefferson put it, "The Ancient Principles." It is not designed to promote lawlessness or a return to the jungle. The "Ancient Principles" refer to the Ten Commandments and the Common Law. The Common Law is, in simple terms, just plain common sense and has its roots in the Ten Commandments.
In 1776 we came out of BONDAGE with FAITH, UNDERSTANDING and COURAGE. Even against great odds, and with much bloodshed, we battled our way to achieve LIBERTY. LIBERTY is that delicate area between the force of government and FREEWILL of man. LIBERTY brings FREEDOM of choice to work, to trade, to go and live wherever one wishes, it leads to ABUNDANCE, ABUNDANCE, if made an end in itself, will result in COMPLACENCY which leads to APATHY.
APATHY is the "let George do it" philosophy. This always brings DEPENDENCY. For a period of time, dependents are often not aware they are dependent. They delude themselves by thinking that they are still free" "We never had it so good" -- "We can still vote, can’t we?"
Eventually abundance diminishes and DEPENDENCY becomes known by its true nature: BONDAGE!!!
There are few ways out of bondage. Bloodshed and war often result, but our founding fathers learned of a better way. Realizing that a CREATOR is always above and greater than that which He creates, they established a three vote system by which an informed citizenry can control those acting in the name of government. To be a good master you must always remember the true "pecking order" or chain of command in this nation:

1. GOD created man
2. Man created the Constitution ...
3. Constitution created government ...
4. Government created corporations ...etc.

The base of power was to remain in WE THE PEOPLE but unfortunately, it was lost to those leaders acting in the name of government, such as politicians, bureaucrats, judges, lawyers, etc.
As a result America began to function like a democracy instead of a REPUBLIC. A democracy is dangerous because it is a one-vote system as opposed to a Republic, which is a three-vote system. Three votes to check tyranny, not just one. American citizens have not been informed of their other two votes.
Our first vote is at the polls on election day when we pick those who are to represent us in the seats of government. But what can be done if those elected officials just don’t perform as promised or as expected? Well, the second two votes are the most effective means by which the common people of any nation on earth have ever had in controlling those appointed to serve them in government. The second vote comes when you serve on a Grand Jury before anyone can be brought to trial for a capital or infamous crime by those acting in the name of government, permission must be obtained from people serving on the Grand Jury! The Minneapolis Star and Tribune in the March 27, 1987 edition, noted a purpose of the Grand Jury this way:
"A grand jury’s purpose is to protect the public from an overzealous prosecutor."
The third is the most powerful vote: This is when you are acting as jury member during a courtroom trial. At this point, "the buck stops" with you! It is in this setting that each JUROR has MORE POWER than the President, all of Congress, and all of the judges combined! Congress can legislate (make law), the president or some other bureaucrat can make an order or issue regulations, and judges may instruct or make a decision, but no JUROR can ever be punished for voting "Not Guilty."
Any JUROR can, with impunity, choose to disregard the instructions of any judge or attorney in rendering his vote.
If only one JUROR should vote "Not Guilty" for any reason, there is no conviction and no punishment at the end of the trial. Thus, those acting in the name of government must come before the common man to get permission to enforce a law.
As a JUROR in a trial setting, when it comes to your individual vote of innocent or guilty, you truly are answerable only to GOD ALMIGHTY. The First Amendment to the Constitution was born out of this great concept. However, judges of today refuse to inform JURORS of their RIGHTS.
The Minneapolis Star and Tribune in a newspaper article appearing in its November 30, 1984 edition, entitled: "What judges don’t tell the juries" stated:
"At the time of the adoption of the Constitution, the jury's role as defense against political oppression was unquestioned in American jurisprudence. This nation survived until the 1850’s, when prosecutions under the Fugitive Slave Act were largely unsuccessful because juries refused to convict.
"Then judges began to erode the institution of free juries, leading to the absurd compromise that is the current state of the law. While our courts uniformly state juries have the power to return a verdict of not guilty, whatever the facts, they routinely tell the jurors the opposite.
"Further, the courts will not allow the defendants or their counsel to inform the jurors of their true power. A lawyer who made ... Hamilton’s argument would face professional discipline and charges of contempt of court.
"By what logic should juries have the power to acquit a defendant but no right to know about that power?
"The court decisions that have suppressed the notion of jury nullification cannot resolve this paradox.
"More than logic has suffered. As originally conceived, juries were to be a kind of safety valve, a way to soften the bureaucratic rigidity of the judicial system by introducing the common sense of the community. If they are to function effectively as the ‘conscience of the community,’ juries must be told that they have the power and the right to say no to a prosecution in order to achieve a greater good. To cut jurors off from this information is to undermine one of our most important institutions.
"Perhaps the community should educate itself. Then citizens called for jury duty could teach judges a needed lesson in civics."

Note from the Editor:
It seems to me that, what with the BATF harassing people for marketing the book Unintended Consequences and the Constitution not being allowed in court as evidence, it is our duty to read everything that the government does not want us to read.

Copies of the Citizens Rulebook can be ordered directly from:

Whitten Printers
1001 south 5th Street
Phoenix, AZ 85004
Phone: (602) 258-6406

1-20 copies, $1 each, 21-100 copies, 75 cents each, 101-250 copies, 65 cents each,
251-500 copies, 55 cents each, 501+ copies, 45 cents each.