Posted on 03/22/2011 4:16:16 AM PDT by stevie_d_64
As one who is currently reporting for jury duty, I assure you that the ones selected to sit on a jury are the dullest knives in the drawer.
If you have a college degree or demonstrate common sense in your answers during the interview, you’re out the door pretty quickly.
Exactly.
I know if you use a word over and over in an incorrect way it loses it’s sting or significance.
Could it be possible the the word terrorism is purposely being overused in order to soften it up? I mean in general. I this case in particular, it is probably being used to guide a courtroom or jury’s decision.
Look at that... Free up the markets and even people like me start finding ways to CREATE JOBS.
The dollar (often represented by the dollar sign $) is the name of the official currency of many countries, including the United States, Canada, the Eastern Caribbean territories, Ecuador, Suriname, El Salvador, Panama, Belize, Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Brunei, East Timor, Australia, and New Zealand.
The Dollar Sign ($), an S crossed by two vertical bars, comes from the coat of arms set up by the King Ferdinand II of Aragon. The ‘S’ represents the motto “Non Plus Ultra” and the vertical bars symbolize the two Pillars of Hercules. This symbol (two pillars with S-shaped motto) first appeared in Spaniard ‘Pieces of eight’ , the currency used in the American colonies of the Spanish Empire, which then spread to the British colonies and later United States and Canada.
The argument that the US Treasury has a monopoly on the usage of the term or symbol for a ‘dollar’ is absurd. No trademark exists exists or law specifically prohibiting its use. Counterfeiting laws prohibit the making of US Federal Reserve Notes and denominations of currency, that was clearly not the intent here.
If it doesn’t say “legal tender”, then it can say whatever else it wants.
I think you're confused.
I got clipped for what I believe is the exact reson you state. I clarified somebody else’s stance as to my view point on it and it flustered the prosecutor who was obviously leading the entire jury during voir dire. The defense objected to his line of questioning me in particular and I got clipped immediately after that.
This is what the King of England did: Claim every crime was a crime against the Crown/State. We kicked his butt and formed our own nation. Seems we might need to kick harder this time.
Pertty simple really. You have a bunch of jurors who are ignorant of the law and their rights as jurors, and the judge pretty much instructed them to return a guilty verdict. The key to modern tyranny when it's not just extreme violence at the point of a gun is almost always through the instructions to the jury.
Wish I could have been on the jury for this one.
These coins fooled no one. This man was prosecuted for a thought crime. He thought he was a free man.
Well, maybe clear to you but definitely not clear to the government and a jury that only needed two hours to unanimously decide that Innes wanted to undermine US currency.
Really not that hard of a call considering Innes had "founded the National Organization for the Repeal of the Federal Reserve and Internal Revenue Code", and then proceeded to say the coins were both "dollars" and a "alternative to official currency."
What people do when they're really not at war with the US currency is that they print up and use bearer bonds and the feds are happy.
Well, they've certainly disabused him of that quaint notion didn't they?
Your comment is pretty much what I've been thinking since I first hear the ferals had raided his business. Reading the various threads on the topic since the trial concluded has been entertaining to say the least. I find it interesting to see the lengths alleged 'conservatives' will go to defend this kind of injustice.
Show me the victim here. He offered tangible goods for sale and was paid for them by willing customers. Were his weights inaccurate? Did he defraud by providing less silver than claimed? Did he not deliver on goods proffered for sale?
I find it to be amazing that there are freepers who will justify charging a man with 'terrorism' for selling precious metals.
Loosening the laces on those boots lowers blood pressure.
Criminal courts, victims only matter when needed to prove guilt of a crime against the state. Restitution to victims is handled under tort law (the victims sue). The prosecutor only needed to prove that Innes broke laws forbidding undermining US currency.
i'm not sure they even did that. From the various articles I've seen, it looks more like a 'conspiracy' charge than anything else.
I don't see how any private citizen can do anything to undermine our currency that would even come close to what the Fed is doing these days.
Had I been on a jury, they'd have had a hell of a time getting me to convict on something like this.
The law has become an insane monstrosity used by the state to further it's own agenda.
If it wasn't against the law in 1910, we need to look long and hard at any law as jurors and decide if they server the cause of justice or just the aims of the state.
See, know you’re looking at this the right way!!!
For every finger they (government) points at us (citizens) there are three pointing right back at you!!!
A silly playground venacular, but it does illustrate the audacity of the whole process...
LOL
--but you are sure that the prosecutor's proof was good enough for the jury.
even come close to what the Fed is doing these days.
If we're getting into a chat about some unconstitutional run away hyperinflation that we've been having then I'll need a minute to line my hat with tin foil.
If it wasn't against the law in 1910...
Undermining the state's currency is against the law in any and every country the moment the country's founded.
Love it!!!
Maybe we can make a special Won-Ton soup for ‘em???
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.