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,
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
Copies of the Citizens Rulebook can be ordered directly from:
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.