I. Under the Constitutional Justice System.
Limitations of the Grand Jury
II. Four Tiers of Judicable Tyranny.
Societies Govern through Their Justice System
Two Ways to Equal Justice
The Constitution Provides the Answer to Misgovernment
Citizens’ Private Prosecutions
III. Constitutional Article 61 Decrees.
The People Comprise the Legal Police Force
The People Police Their Administration (‘government’)
Excerpt from Article 61
Enforcing Constitutional Law Is Never “Rebellion”
Scorn and the Power of Words
John Gouriet: “Rebellion” Confers Legitimacy on Perpetrators
IV. The Sentence of Excommunication
Article 61 Also Confirms the People’s Sovereignty
V. The Constitution Was Itself an Act of RESTORATION
The Constitution Perpetually Ordains RESTORATION
RESTORATION: The Vision, Inspiration and Solution
Consider the Benefits of RESTORATION
I. UNDER THE CONSTITUTIONAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
GRAND JURIES HAVE LIMITED FUNCTIONALITY.
The 1215 Great Charter Constitution set in place the Common Law Trial by (petit) Jury Justice System for the obtainment of Equal Justice for All, without necessitating any recourse to grand juries. The petit Trial by Jury and the grand jury are as unalike as chalk and cheese and once you have learned the differences, no longer will you say the grand jury is “as important” a procedure as Trial by Jury.
The first simple points to learn are that, Constitutionally and legally-speaking, ALL laws are enforced and are ONLY enforced at the behest of the Jury’s judicium (judgement; verdicts and sentences) in the petit Trial by Jury. The authentic Common Law Trial by Jury is the sole legal Justice System for all (unimpeachable) causes, i.e., suits-at-law, civil, criminal and fiscal. In the greatest contrast, NO laws are enforced through grand juries, which are merely an investigative tool.
The Constitution prescribes but one supreme system for deciding the law and its enforcement: it is “judicium parium,” the Trial by Jury defined by the Law of the Land legem terræ* common law Articles of the 1215 Great Charter.
*terræ is pronounced terry; the æ as in Cæsar; seize.
Trial by Jury is the central tenet and sole legal Justice System of legem terræ, the Common Law. Whatever the grand jury may or may not contribute to the proper functioning of society, it is only through the Common Law Powers, Procedures, Rights and Duties of the Juror in the Trial by (petit) Jury that all wrongdoers are finally held to account; not by grand juries.
The grand jury has limited functionality, and generally none at all in cases involving prosecutions for infractions of the Constitution, the Common Law and for the commission of Crimes against the People by the head of state, members of the legislature, and functionaries in the prosecution service, bureaucracy and judiciary.
It is relevant to note here that without the Constitutional Trial by Jury having been restored, there is no (peaceful) legal way of calling wayward government to account and permanently holding all governance, local and national, on the straight and narrow path.
LIMITATIONS OF THE GRAND JURY.
Following their review of evidence presented to them, when Grand Juries determine an indictable offence has been committed, it is the government prosecution service which undertakes to prosecute the case in a Trial by Jury. This is unsatisfactory in instances where the evidence which requires to receive due process is that which indicts as criminal the activities and machinations of people within government (i.e., executive, legislature and judiciary), local government, those such as members of the prosecution service itself, and state, fiscal and treasury bureaucrats, etc.
It is ill-advised and naïve to ask or expect government personnel and employees to prosecute their masters (that is, their employers) and colleagues effectively. This is unrealistic, and remains wholly inadequate to the needs of a population seeking to protect itself for all time from the judicable* and tyrannical* deeds of misgovernment.
*Definitions. Tyranny is defined as oppressive rule administered with injustice; the cruel and arbitrary use of authority.
* judicable, that which may be tried by jury in a court of law.
The object of a formal grand jury is to ascertain whether evidence provides a cause for the indictment of a person in a petit Trial by Jury. A (mere) majority of the grand jury (not Unanimity as in the petit Trial by Jury) is sufficient to decide whether the issue should progress on to a Trial by Jury. The standard of proof in a grand jury investigation does not receive the same rigorous testing, “beyond a reasonable doubt,” as in the petit Trial by Jury.
When the outcome of a grand jury indicates there is a cause for indictment of a person or persons in a petit Trial by Jury, it is… the government (Crown) Prosecution Service which proceeds with the prosecution… So, the grand jury does have a rôle in common crimes not involving indictments of persons in government. With common crimes, when the grand jury’s outcome so indicates, the government (Crown) prosecution service may prosecute the case in a petit Trial by Jury.
However, when it is the high crime of tyranny or corruption within government itself which requires to be eliminated, then expecting the government prosecution service to pursue the case effectively is the most vacuous of aspirations.
II. FOUR TIERS OF JUDICABLE TYRANNY.
Definition. judicable, that which may be tried by jury in a court of law.
You say the grand jury process is “just as important” as Trial by Jury, but ask yourself…
1. Would one really expect the prosecution service to prosecute its own personnel ? — the very people who themselves have participated in punishable acts of malicious, i.e., criminal, enforcement of politicians’ venal, apocryphal, illegal legislation.
2. Would that prosecution service then prosecute the corrupted courts, the judges ?
— the very judges who have permitted and abetted the aforesaid malicious prosecutions;
— the judges who have culpably maintained and illegally enforced venal, inequitable, apocryphal, and partisan legislation;
— judges who have arranged “the evidence” in countless trials to exclude evidence which does exonerate and vindicate countless innocent defendants, judges thereby denying the presentation for the Jurors’ consideration of such exonerative evidence, whenever the evidence “disputes the legality” of the law;
— judges who have excluded defences which indicate that the defendant’s acts and motives bore no malice aforethought; that is, the acts and motives of the defendant were definitively innocent; judges who thus presided over an inherently illegal form of “trial” (mistrial) in which defendant and counsel are prevented from explaining to the Jury that, definitively, Guilt of a crime may only be ascribed to activities which are intrinsically of premeditated malicious intent (that is, no mens rea: Not Guilty).
These judges have with premeditation and malice aforethought wrongfully penalised, incarcerated, fined and otherwise persecuted innocent citizens;
— judges who have abused their power and position, and, through unconstitutional ex parte [one-sided; ‘rigged’] processes, have denied the Jurors their Constitutionally delegated Common Law Powers, Rights, Duties and Procedures in the Trial by Jury;
See details in THE REPORT ISBN 9781902848204. Link below.
— judges who have enforced massively crime-engendering, inherently illegal ‘legislation’ in the false name of ‘law’, thereby committing Crimes against Humanity…
“To cause crime to occur is to be accountable for the crime, morally and legally. To consent to any measure is to share responsibility for its results.”
See THE REPORT ISBN 9781902848204, Part Six, PROHIBITION: THE PROGENITOR OF CRIME. Link below.
3. Still less would the “Prosecution Service” together with the “judges” then confront their treasonous masters in the legislature: the politicians, upon whom they are dependent for appointments, salaries and careers.
4. So, can anyone really imagine that these lawyers and judges, corrupted lackeys who have despicably suborned their conscience in order to follow lucrative careers as employees of oppressive government, then would arraign the ultimate villains … ?
— …the tiny malevolent mammon-worshipping clique who finance and control all the significant political parties; who are installing the ‘new world order’, a ‘one world government’ answerable to no one;
— …those few supra-national dictators above the politicians, Rothschild, Rockefellers (Chase Manhattan), Bushes (Brown Brothers Harriman) et al; the private owners of the Central Banks (the B of E, the Federal Reserve, etc.) who exercise power through the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and set the international treaty agenda of the United Nations, binding the nation states to their ambitions through the collusion of treasonous, unprincipled national politicians.
The suggestion of convening a ‘grand jury’ to ‘confront’ any or all of the above four tiers of Organised Crime by Government represents an exercise in phoniness and futility.
Described above are the circumstances which embody the greatest crimes being committed today. Never let it be forgotten that throughout the History of the World right up to date, ALL the greatest CRIMES have been and are being perpetrated by, and in the name of, government.
Nevertheless, given RESTORATION of the People’s Constitutional Courts of the Common Law Trial by Jury Justice System backed by the apparatus of police, prison service and Armed Services, no problem arises from the non-functionality of grand juries in these contexts. This is because the petit Trial by Jury provides the proverbial double-edged blade in protection of the people both from common crime and crime by government (tyranny). See as follows.
“All societies govern through their Justice System:
The power to punish carries with it ALL power.”
Viz. DEMOCRACY DEFINED, ISBN 9781902848228.
There is only one (peaceful) way known to mankind by which people everywhere may achieve and maintain real emancipation from the injustices being wreaked by today’s politicians, judiciary, and the encroachments of the new world order dictatorship: it is by RESTORATION of control of the secular (and hence universally applicable) Justice System as it is defined and prescribed by the 1215 Great Charter Constitution.
Trial by Jury is the constitutionally-intended control by the people (as distinct from government) over the Justice System, and over all laws, statutes and acts of enforcement.
RESTORATION of responsible Power to the People through the Trial by Jury Courts resolves nearly all, or all, other socio-political and economic problems: it brings the felonious government and bank-owners to justice; it retakes the People’s control over, and emplaces ongoing scrutiny of the issuance of national currency and credit.
Nothing of significance or lasting worth can be accomplished or maintained without RESTORATION to the People of control over the Justice System. Only following Restoration shall we see preclusion of the infliction of antidemocratic legislation through despotic governments’ instrument of persecution: the trial-by-judge.
If you are already acquainted with these facts, then you will know that today there is no secular cause or issue more important than that of Restoration.
TWO WAYS TO EQUAL JUSTICE FOR ALL.
THE GREAT CHARTER PROVIDES
THE ANSWER TO MISGOVERNMENT:
One must remember that the principal reason for the emplacement of the Great Charter Constitution was to provide the population for all time with the means for the elimination of crimes in general and those of tyranny and despotism especially; these latter being the most pernicious known to mankind. In confronting government crime, there is no necessity for the grand jury, which, as explained above, would in any case be inadequate to the needs of the elimination of tyranny.
Through the wisdom and experience of our forebears who authored it, the 1215 Great Charter Constitution provides the means by which government personnel may be held accountable to the secular, universally-applicable moral strictures of the Natural and Common Law, legem terræ, the Law of the Land.
The authentic Constitutional legem terræ Common Law Trial by Jury operates either
(i) as a means of cost-free* private civil, criminal or fiscal prosecution to establish rights and punish or obtain redress for wrongs, including those committed by persons in government,
(ii) as a right by which to establish a person’s innocence (lack of guilt or liability) in defence from all and any fines, summary punishments, accusation or prosecution.
*Viz. legem terræ Law of the Land Article 40 inscribed into the Constitution:
“To no one will we sell, to no one deny or delay right or justice.”
According to common law governing Constitutional Trial by Jury (which is now illegally obstructed by politicians, the Law Society and courts), cost-free prosecutions can be brought directly by private citizens (individuals or multiple plaintiffs) to a Trial by Jury. Trial by Jury is not the ‘preserve’ of the government prosecution service and legal profession. Private, cost-free prosecutions in the (petit) Trial by Jury by single or multiple plaintiffs combined, serve the needs of Justice in all cases, civil, criminal and fiscal. The significance of this vital legal asset of our Constitution, which combines to magnificent effectiveness with Articles 24, 39 and 61, has gone straight past the “constitutional campaigners” groups without mention…
If a citizen is unable to obtain Trial by Jury for either of the aforesaid purposes (i) and (ii), that fact establishes the Illegality of the Status Quo. It then becomes the principal duty of every adult to restore legality to society by campaigning specifically for Restoration of Constitutional Common Law Trial by Jury.
Notes: (i) Vexatious and malicious litigation which waste the court’s, i.e., the jury’s, time can be decided upon and such litigants fined by juries (the issues having been tried in a lawful Trial by Jury).
(ii) Petitions are suitably reserved for mild grievances: that is to say, petitioning should not be used to replace dutiful indictment and the due process of Trial by Jury to confront criminal behaviours and/or breaches of the Constitution by persons in government.
CITIZENS’ PRIVATE PROSECUTIONS:
SINGLE OR MULTIPLE PLAINTIFFS.
Trial by Jury is too often thought of by people only as a situation wherein the accused defends him or herself, usually from the government’s prosecution. As distinguished from the despot’s charade which takes the place of Trial by Jury in the courtroom today, the proper Constitutional Common Law Trial by Jury is much more than that. It is a supreme weapon in the hands of the people, enabling them peacefully to foil would-be tyrants and to obliterate crime-engendering inherently illegal laws and legislatorial majorities’ self-interested, venal legislation.
Plaintiff(s)’ direct private prosecution in a petit Trial by Jury renders redundant the process of the Grand Jury.
Laws which are plainly just require little debate or explanation. Until a written law is thus evidently and plainly just it merits no place in the statute book: its prosecution requires Annulment-by-Jury; its expunction from the roll of legislation is mandated by juries’ rejection of its enforcement.
Private prosecution methodologically achieves the expunction of arbitrary, illegal laws in the following way:
A principle of legem terræ, the universal secular common law, is that no judgement (cf. sentence) can be valid against a party’s goods or person, including a judgement for contempt or costs, unless it be a judgement rendered by a jury following the common law Trial by Jury.
As noted, where the randomly-selected jury finds unanimously that a frivolous or malicious charge has been brought, the plaintiff(s) are liable for costs and damages. Such a prospect discourages or eliminates unjustifiable prosecutions.
However, where multiple citizens unite together as co-plaintiffs in the same prosecution, this has the effect of establishing that their grievance is genuine and that the action taken by them of bringing racketeering members of the government to Trial by Jury embodies their fulfilment of a conscientious public obligation or duty. This precludes unanimous judgements by juries against the plaintiffs for costs, though this does not necessarily establish the guilt of the nominated defendant/s.
In a single or a succession of Trial(s) by Jury throughout the land, the presenting of evidence establishing the collusion of politicians, judiciary and government bureaucrats in premeditated criminal acts, under the guise of the framing and passing of specified ‘legislation’, renders void that legislation and removes from public office those found guilty of the behaviour. Such legislation would be that which the jury finds to be: criminogenic (crime-producing and thus inherently illegal); inequitable; partial; partisan; venal; arbitrary, unjust or in any way un-Constitutional or against the public interest. Today, those persons who have suffered persecution under such misbgotten ‘laws’ qualify for Amnesty and compensatory Restitution (as for other Wrongful Penalisation).
As ever, the degree of guilt (malice aforethought; mens rea) discerned by the jurors in the criminality of the accused goes towards the determining by the jury of their sentence. (Self-evidently, government personnel may not judge in their own cause and hence are automatically deprived of power to moderate such sentences or to pardon.) Defendants are entitled to appeal against conviction or sentence and for re-Trial by a new Jury.
III. CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 61 DECREES:
THE PEOPLE COMPRISE THE LEGAL POLICE FORCE;
THE PEOPLE POLICE THEIR ADMINSTRATION (‘GOVERNMENT’).
The virtually immutable Great Charter Constitution (Magna Carta) was installed by our freemen, barons and churchmen. These were law-abiding citizens righteously intent upon re-establishing Justice, Liberty and the Rule of Law in an epoch made turbulent by the despotic renegade authority of an acquisitive tyrant masquerading as a ‘lawful monarch’.
(Amendment to any single Article of Magna Carta may be effected only by the greatest mass of the total population actively authorising such in a plebiscite, non-participation constituting a refusal; a ‘No-vote’ rejecting the plebiscite and amendment. Common Law and Constitution supersede legislature and monarch.)
Under the Illegality of the Status Quo which prevailed in 1215 (principally embodied in denial of the Sovereignty of the Juror in Trial by Jury), John was inflicting a reign of terror*: widespread injustice, acts of disseisin (unlawful dispossession of property) at the hands of venal government judges; of his mercenary forces committing homicide, acts of wanton butchery, torture, the cutting-out of tongues, the putting out of eyes, the slitting-off of ears and noses, of robbery, rapine, extortion, and depredation; in short, inhuman misrule by outlaws.
*See TRIAL BY JURY: Its History, True Purpose and Modern Relevance, by d’Oudney and Spooner, ISBN 9781902848723.
For the well-being of the entire population, Magna Carta recognised and authorised “for ever” and “in perpetuity,” the people’s supreme duty to curtail criminality in government and uphold and enforce Equal Justice. By its Articles, the Great Charter restored, defined and prescribed judicium parium, the all-powerful Trial by Jury which remains the only Justice System known to humankind by which to achieve this object peacefully.
Being mindful of the terrifying despotism of the times, Magna Carta makes it incumbent upon the ordinary citizens to apply the due process of the Trial by Jury Justice System to confront criminality in all its manifestations, and annihilate contumacious tyranny.
One utilises the word ‘contumacious’ advisedly, with the meaning of “wilfully disobedient to authority,” for the individuals and agencies of government who function in a criminal, tyrannical way are felons rebelling against the authority of Law in general and in particular against the Sovereignty* of the Juror in Constitutional Trial by Jury. Such criminals in government infract the secular, universal Common Law, and the Rule of Law as defined and applied through the decisions of Jurors in Trial by Jury, to which all citizens, including those in government administration without exception, are subject.
*Definition. Sovereignty, pre-eminence; the supreme and independent power expressed through the making and enforcing of the laws.
Constitutionally, the sole legal means for deciding all causes (lawsuits), civil, criminal and fiscal, is the Common Law Trial by Jury. There is no other legitimate Justice System.
Regarding the government-propagated false notion of “government and judicial immunity from prosecution”:
Article 61 of the Great Charter decrees that the people have the permanent duty to enforce their Constitution and the common law legem terræ, and protect themselves from lawlessness and injustices inflicted by government.
Article 61 establishes that no one is ‘above’ the common law of the land. No one who infracts legem terræ is ‘immune’ to prosecution. This stricture explicitly includes the head of state, the most powerful people, government itself (i.e., executive, legislature and judiciary), and all the agencies of government.
The common law Articles of the Great Charter Constitution prescribe that for any charge or offence, however serious or trivial, no person shall be dispossessed, fined, punished or in any way disadvantaged except, nisi per, “unless according to” the judgement or sentence of a unanimous jury of jurors randomly chosen according to common law principles, of his or her social-equals in the Trial by Jury.
That is to say, including judgements for contempt or costs, government only has the power to act against a person, his property or liberties, by the authority of and according to the lawful sentence of a common law jury following a legal Trial by Jury. The Jury has the judicial rôle while judge and government has the executive function of carrying out judicium (the judgement; verdict and sentence) of the Jury.
EXCERPT FROM ARTICLE 61:
“If we (head of state), our chief justice, our officials (government), or any of our servants (government employees, police, armed services and bureaucrats) offend in any respect against any man, or transgress any of the Articles of the peace or of this security… any man who so desires may take an oath to obey the commands of the twenty-five barons for the achievement of these ends, and to join with them in assailing (using physical force if required; arresting) us (head of state and government) to the utmost of his power.
We give public and free permission to take this oath to any man who so desires, and at no time will we prohibit any man from taking it. Indeed, we will compel any of our subjects who are unwilling to take it to swear it at our command.”
According to Legem Terræ Common Law inscribed as Article 61 of the 1215 Great Charter, government personnel responsible for attempting to undermine, or actually undermining, and/or contravening the Great Charter, are to be arrested (“assailed”), and Tried by Jury thereto.
The central point here is that the Great Charter Constitution Magna Carta places unequivocally on the People at large the privilege and burden of its own perpetuation and enforcement.
POLICING AND ENFORCING
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW IS NEVER “REBELLION.”
Those who uphold and enforce constitutional common law on wrongdoers are never to be thought of or described as “rebels” ? any more than is the policeman who performs his duty by accosting felons. He is doing his duty: he is not “rebelling” !
Whilst this Restoration Campaign wishes success to all efforts to uphold Magna Carta and bring government back under the Rule of Constitution and Law, it must be observed that it reveals people’s lack of understanding of their own Great Charter Constitution, the very inspiration of all subsequent legitimate constitutions, the Australian, the U.S., etc., that they could even contemplate using that disrespectful, self-contradictory term ‘lawful rebellion’ as a slogan, for it misleads people and totally misrepresents the honourable purposes of our Constitution.
Understanding of the circumstances surrounding the inception of Magna Carta and of its contents reveals that it cannot sensibly be extrapolated from any aspect of the writing within it that it “permits” any type of “rebellion” whatsoever. On the contrary indeed, it obliges the population responsibly to police their own society; to treat as crimes all infractions of its Articles; and for Jurors to vet, judge, decide, make and enforce the laws.
It defies logic, reason and history to suggest that the upholding of the Rule of Law and Constitution could ever be an act of “rebellion.”
As shown, the People’s duty to enforce the Constitution and restore legitimacy to government is explicit in the Constitution. That is inevitably so because, when persons in government are participants in crimes and criminal contraventions of the Constitution in general, and particularly those embodied in denial of the People’s Courts of the Constitutional Trial by Jury Justice System, it is ineluctably incumbent upon the responsible citizenry to restore it, for there is no other party to whom the task can be entrusted.
Definitions: government is comprised of the executive, the legislature and the judiciary.
citizenry, the population of citizens collectively including military personnel.
Nota Bene, John (Hurst), the “BCG” et al:
Magna Carta permits NO act of ‘rebellion’. On the contrary, such acts are proscribed by the Great Charter. Yet, we notice, John, you are still calling yourself a “lawful” rebel.
Consider that, in the absence of police, does the upright citizen stand idly by as a spectator to permit the rape or robbery of a fragile woman or child, if he is able by words or actions to prevent it ? Of course not. Then, is that citizen’s dutiful act of policing society to prevent a crime, rebellion ? You will, of course, agree that it is not ‘rebellion’ at all and could never sensibly be called one .
It is the duty of all citizens at all times and in all ways possible to uphold the Common Law, which defines as Crime, sine qua non, all acts of injustice committed with malice aforethought. Unsurprisingly, to preclude tyranny, this universal duty of citizens to police society by upholding the common law is inscribed into the Articles of the Constitution, including 61. Those who perform this duty are fully and legally authorised to do so.
It should be noted that mass support for RESTORATION was the peaceful method by which Magna Carta was itself installed; and the accomplishment of another such Act is exigent today. Indeed, Restoration is the only peaceful way of saving the British population from the extant tyranny.
SCORN AND THE POWER OF WORDS.
Intellectuals, barristers (lawyers), writers and public speakers such as politicians know well how men and women are swayed and controlled by the choice and use of words. This issue is not one of mere academia and semantics: it relates to the unavoidable impact of words upon people’s psyche.
Consider the word ‘government’. It implies authority over those whom it ‘governs’. Every time the word is used, a spurious myth is entrenched into the mind, reason and memory, which confers psychological subjection and inferiority onto the individual and populace.
However, correctly-speaking — and as recognised by our Constitution — legally, government is nothing more than a nuts-and-bolts administrative mechanism empowered only insofar as the Jury allows. That is to say, every individual within government or paid by the people’s finances, remains entirely subject to the People, the Rule of Law and the Trial by Jury Justice System. Yet, it takes a conscious effort to remind oneself of these facts because we are daily, if not hourly, conditioned to accept ‘government’ as a “supreme body above us,” which it is NOT.
Under the law, government is the servant of the People paid for out of the pockets of the population who are its masters.
Likewise, the term “lawful rebellion” is the cunning cynic’s supercilious, scornful linguistic mutilation; a collusive government lawyer’s scoffing contradiction-in-terms to ridicule “the plebs,” and to bring into disrepute the citizen-juror’s Constitutional Duty to prevail over the illegalities of the administration and hold government to legitimacy.
The serious Crime of Sedition is the act by conduct or speech of inciting people to rebel against the authority of a state.
By definition and in the event, “rebellion” is an unbridled, lawless activity; it is intermittent, sporadic, even spontaneous.
“Rebellion” is NOT to be confused with the sober, civilised duty of the ongoing upholding of constitutional law by the People as ordained by the Great Charter: a permanent task of spreading educational information, of raising people’s awareness of the purpose, meaning and supreme nature of the Constitution, and of the Citizens’ Duty to enforce the common law.
The people who support the self-named “British Constitution Group” deserve a better education about their Great Charter Constitution than this group proffers. People who do understand our Constitution are repelled from joining such a group’s ranks by that ill-considered, indeed inane “lawful rebellion” slogan. It stimulates, attracts and motivates only riff-raff who have not the slightest inkling of the terms of the Constitution and are spoiling for a physical confrontation; all of which goes to undermine the Constitution.
There is every reason to suppose that, with a reasonable understanding of the moral superiority and justice of the Cause for RESTORATION of the Constitution and the People’s control over the Justice System (Trial by Jury), the greatest part of the British People will unite in its support, again, as with Magna Carta. This Cause will progress as people see their liberties and prosperity disappearing, and injustices being inflicted everywhere by the judges’ courts and European Union.
Today, We the People recognise the Illegality of the Status Quo: we see throughout our land, suffering and injustice at the hands of government; we observe government’s wayward employees and personnel as organised agencies of crime. We campaign because it is our moral, constitutional and legal obligation so to do; to have miscreant politicians, bureaucrats and judges brought to justice; to restore and heal our Country and bring government to conformity with the 1215 Great Charter Constitution’s eternal, secular, universally-applicable tenets of morality and law.
The self-serving politicians and their subject employees (the state bureaucrats, lawyers, prosecution service, Law Society and judges), are today career servitors of crime and misgovernance. These statists oppose and deny the Constitutional duty of citizens as Jurors to judge the justice of the laws and all acts of enforcement of law. Thereby, they criminally infract the Constitution and common law. Instead of respecting the Rule of Law and upholding the People’s inherent dignity and rights, they instigate repeated avalanches of inequitable, apocryphal, unfounded, money-motivated, crime-engendering, inherently-illegal arbitrary (tyrannical) legislation*.
*See THE REPORT ISBN 9781902848204; synopsis below. To enable enforcement of the aforesaid illicit legislation, judges exclude evidence which exonerates defendants. This unlawfully excluded expert evidence includes documentary, legal, academic, economic, scientific, medical, technical, philosophical, and that which is based on grounds of equity. Today, judges tell jurors (if a process of Trial by Jury can be obtained) to consider only that evidence which he or she (the judge) allows !
It is these felons, the enemies of the people, who utilise the derogatory expression “lawful rebellion” to bring the Great Charter into disrepute. They wish to obliterate our Constitution precisely because it obliges citizens to uphold the law and prosecute them. This unconscionable clique of men and women in politics, banking and the judiciary intend to annihilate the People’s rights and duty to enforce justice upon criminals in government or powerful positions in society.
In verity, the policing of society and the just enforcement of Constitution and common law are never “rebellion.” Beware! That is the perverted miswording of those who work for the illegal régime.
“REBELLION” CONFERS LEGITIMACY ON THE PERPETRATORS.
The moral high ground is held by those who are active in trying to uphold the Great Charter Constitution and its Rule of Law. This is explained below. People are correct to deprecate the use of the term “rebellion” as it is a misnomer in this context; and because unlawful implications are inextricably implicated within the word.
This Campaign works to save one’s country and Constitution from the grip of vicious villains who have misappropriated power and usurped the Sovereignty of the People. To describe such beneficent campaigning as “lawful rebellion” is a self-defeating malignance for several reasons.
To begin with, it demonstrates an abject ignorance of Common Law and a complete failure to understand our Constitution.
Further, the campaigners are not only morally ascendant over the malefactors within government, they are also legally so. That is, the campaigners for Restoration of the Constitution and its Trial by Jury Justice System are fulfilling the duty designated to the people by the Constitution. The campaigners are those very people who are legally enjoined to arrest-and-try (“assail”) the malefactors; campaigners are the Constitutionally-designated legal Authority to do all they can to uphold the law.
The campaigners are legally emplaced over the malefactors in government. The campaigners are not subject status and not rebels. (The word “rebellion” confers subject status, insecurity upon the “rebels” and a spurious ‘legitimacy’ on the usurpers.)
Moreover, despite claiming lawfulness, the word “rebellion” nevertheless confers an undeserved rabble status upon those who use the term. It could not fit those who responsibly seek to uphold and police the law within the provisions of Constitution and Common Law.
Many a dutiful citizen person would reject affiliation with those who are prepared to use such an incorrect, unsuitable and self-derogating term as “rebellion.”
Another significant aspect is that the term “rebellion” capitulates, surrendering the moral high ground to those ensconced smugly in the administration who are perpetrators of criminal infractions against the Constitution and People. This is the negative effect upon the Campaign intended by persons who sneeringly refer to it as “lawful rebellion.”
As the People embody Sovereignty prosecuting and governing through Trial by Jury, and the Constitution commands their policing of government, this dutiful exercise by people of their legal and lawful authority cannot ever correctly be termed “rebellion.”
John (Hurst) and “BCG” leaders,
In addition to our paper provided to you, correct understanding of Article 61 of the Constitution was explained to you by John Gouriet, Chairman, Defenders of the Realm, who wrote us the following:
“Dear Kenn and Astra,
I am most grateful to you for your timely paper on Magna Carta. It has arrived just in time for the second conference on “Lawful Rebellion”, to whose organisers I have forwarded your paper. I entirely agree with your view. To talk of ‘rebellion’ somehow confers legitimacy on those who are set in authority over us and who ignore or abuse the constitution without authority in pursuit of their own political goals, when it is they who are the perpetrators and are clearly at fault.”
“A similar myth was created by the BBC during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan during the 1980s when they described the Mujahideen as “guerillas and terrorists fighting the [impliedly lawful] government” (a puppet regime established in Kabul by the invaders) as though it was the Mujahideen who were at fault for trying to free their country; not the foreign oppressors!”
John Gouriet, Chairman, Defenders of the Realm; Battle for Britain Campaign supported by The Duke of Wellington; Edward Fox, OBE, and Frederick Forsyth, CBE.
IV. THE SENTENCE OF EXCOMMUNICATION:
ARTICLE 61 ALSO CONFIRMS THE PEOPLE’S SOVEREIGNTY.
In addition to the Jurors’ control over law and its enforcement in the Trial by Jury, the People’s authority to enforce the Constitution’s provisions is reinforced by government itself, by the perpetually applicable imposition of the Sentence of Excommunication on the perpetrators of infractions of Magna Carta; see as follows. As always, Jurors decide appropriate retribution, but as far as government is concerned, the form of retribution recommended by government itself for those found Guilty of infractions of Magna Carta (treason and/or other crime/s) is that of (a latterday secular) Excommunication.
Common Law Trial by Jury and the strictures of Magna Carta are taken so seriously as to incur the most complete and total damnation then known to society, Excommunication, upon any government or any individual who breaches or undermines in the slightest way, these constitutional laws and Justice System, then or now, and for all future time.
Excommunication is internal exile, outlawry, deprivation of the protection of the law, and social disgrace which separates the convict recipient from all familial, business and social intercourse with other members of society. Excommunication is a life-threatening sentence and condition.
See this excerpt from TRIAL BY JURY: Its History, True Purpose and Modern Relevance, by d’Oudney and Spooner, ISBN 9781902848723:
The terms and the formalities of some of these “confirmations” make them worthy of insertion at length. Hume thus describes one which took place in the thirty-eighth year of Henry the Third (1253):
“But as they (the barons) had experienced his (the king’s) frequent breach of promise, they required that he should ratify the Great Charter in a manner still more authentic and solemn than any which he had hitherto employed. All the prelates and abbots were assembled. They held burning tapers in their hands. The Great Charter was read before them. They denounced [i.e., pronounced] the sentence of excommunication against everyone who should thenceforth violate that fundamental law [Magna Carta]. They threw their tapers on the ground, and exclaimed, May the soul of everyone who incurs this sentence so stink and corrupt in hell ! The king bore a part in this ceremony, and subjoined [added], ‘So help me God ! I will keep all these articles inviolate, as I am a man, as I am a Christian, as I am a knight, and as I am a king crowned and annointed.’ ”
See Hume’s History of England, ch. 12.
See Blackstone’s Introd. to the Charters, Blackstone’s Law Tracts, Oxford ed., p. 332.
See Mackintosh’s Hist. of Eng., ch. 3. Lardner’s Cab. Cyc., vol. 45, p. 233-4.
To read the Excommunication in detail, see p. 209 of TRIAL BY JURY: Its History, True Purpose and Modern Relevance, by d’Oudney and Spooner, ISBN 9781902848723.
See also Statutes of the Realm, Vol. 1, p. 6; and Ruffhead’s Statutes, Vol. 1, p. 20.
See also the section pp. 34-5 on THE CONSTITUTIONAL QUALITIES OF SUPREMACY AND PERMANENCE EMBODIED IN MAGNA CARTA; ref. Essay downloadable for free located near the top of the Campaign Material webpage.
V. THE CONSTITUTION WAS ITSELF AN ACT OF RESTORATION:
THE CONSTITUTION PERPETUALLY ORDAINS RESTORATION.
Today, again, it is the felons in parliament and judiciary who are rebelling against the Constitution’s Rule of Law; NOT We the People who seek to restore and maintain it.
Restoration was and remains the practical and legal Solution to lawless government. It is straightforward and completely effective: the Restoration of Constitutional Trial by Jury puts into effect the transfer back to the people of what government has illegally seized and denied: that is, control by common law Juries over the Justice System, with responsibility for judging over the statutes and all acts of law enforcement. Such an act of Restoration remains effective for generations.
Knowledge of the events surrounding Magna Carta reveals that the Great Charter was an act of Restoration of the then already long-existing Trial by Jury Justice System which had been usurped by the invasive Norman government (although the Normans had previously adopted Trial by Jury, as did all the people’s of Europe).
“It cannot be denied that the practice of submitting causes to the decision of twelve men was universal among all the northern tribes (of Europe) from the very remotest antiquity.”
Crabbe’s History of the English Law, p. 32.
Citizens “united as one man” to restore their Trial by Jury Justice System thereby restoring legality to the status quo and legitimacy to government.
If upholding the interests of all the people, preserving our cherished heritage, liberty, superior Constitution and Justice System represents the goal, then, campaigners, be warned that little of worth will ensue from time spent simply informing people about the various facets of our disparate Constitutional laws and their history; however interesting. All time, effort and resources expended on “campaigns” are wasted unless they are specifically deployed to educate, concentrate and achieve Restoration of Trial by Jury.
Restoration of Trial by Jury must be the focus and inspiration of all efforts to save our country. With it, all will be resolved: without such Restoration, there is no real Solution. Although there might be some small apparent “wins” periodically, these will be reversed in due course by tyranny exerted through the EU and the trial-by-government-judge.
Campaigns which do not propagate concentrated knowledge about the SOLUTION embodied in RESTORATION OF TRIAL BY JURY to overcome the Illegality of the Status Quo, are merely counterproductive distractions. These “campaigns” waste people’s time energy and resources, thereby actually assisting the Enemies of the People. These “prophets of doom” who spread the miserable news of the problems we face without simultaneously inspiring people with the Restoration Solution are a part of the problem.
RESTORATION: THE VISION, INSPIRATION AND SOLUTION.
RESTORATION must be the central focus, vision, inspiration and message of any campaign to save England and uphold our Constitution. Even severance from the EU cannot restore legitimacy to the status quo, for we shall still be governed by traitors in the political parties who deny the authentic Courts of the Common Law Trial by Jury.
Restoration of Trial by Jury returns to the People control over the Justice System backed by the apparatus of police, prison service and Armed Services. Only Restoration can achieve and thereafter maintain the Rule of Law.
Consider the benefits of…
RESTORATION OF TRIAL BY JURY.
If the authentic Constitutional Trial by Jury were restored and functioning, there would be: no political prisoners; no innocent people in jail; no privately-owned banks involved in the issuance of national currency and credit; no interest on the same; no ‘National Debt’; no private-bank Fractional Reserve Lending (fraud); no common law Crime of Usury (money-lending-at-interest); and no involvement in illegal Wars of Aggression. (Just for starters.)
Regaining control over the Justice System by restoring Constitutional Trial by Jury is so much the principal campaigning objective that all other issues are dwarfed by it.