-1 vote

Trial by Forum Jury


An experiment in government by the consent of the governed is not a new idea.


FOR more than six hundred years - that is, since Magna Carta, in 1215 - there has been no clearer principle of English or American constitutional law, than that, in criminal cases, it is not only the right and duty of juries to judge what are the facts, what is the law, and what was the moral intent of the accused; but that it is also their right, and their primary and paramount duty, to judge of the justice of the law, and to hold all laws invalid, that are, in their opinion, unjust or oppressive, and all persons guiltless in violating, or resisting the execution of, such laws.

Unless such be the right and duty of jurors, it is plain that, instead of juries being a "palladium of liberty "- a barrier against the tyranny and oppression of the government - they are really mere tools in its hands, for carrying into execution any injustice and oppression it may desire to have executed.

But for their right to judge of the law, and the justice of the law, juries would be no protection to an accused person, even as to matters of fact; for, if the government can dictate to a jury any law whatever, in a criminal case, it can certainly dictate to them the laws of evidence. That is, it can dictate what evidence is admissible, and what inadmissible, and also what force or weight is to be given to the evidence admitted. And if the government can thus dictate to a jury the laws of evidence, it can not only make it necessary for them to convict on a partial exhibition of the evidence rightfully pertaining to the case, but it can even require them to convict on any evidence whatever that it pleases to offer them.

Those self-governors in England had to get rid of the Trolls in England in order to return to civilized, voluntary, life. The Trolls in England were the Imperial Roman Invaders.

Then this happened:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

The Trolls took over England and corrupted voluntary government so the self-governing, free minded, voluntary people fled like runaway slaves to America, and those Liberated people brought trial by jury with them to the American constitutionally limited states where government was maintained by the consent of the governed, at least until 1788.

The current Trolls invade this Forum intending to enslave their targeted victims with their lies.

The idea behind this proposal is to band together as free minded individuals and by our individual efforts we the people of this forum employ the concept of trial by jury in the effort to defend against the Trolls.

I can offer steps by which that defense of our common liberty can be defended.

If, for example, a Troll is perpetrating a personal attack upon one of the members of this forum, then that example of that personal attack by a Troll can be linked to this Forum Topic, and a trial by voluntary jury can commence in some new inventive shape or form.

Since "sticks and stones can hurt my bones but names will..." only hurt the innocent who are injured by Trolls perpetrating libelous personal attacks on forums, it may be a good idea to stand in defense of the innocent, since the innocent are often incapable of defending themselves.

I hope you all have a beautiful day, at the expense of no innocent victims.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Should this ever come into

Should this ever come into fruition present or future, i'd propose, that the "jurors" cannot bring up judgement of its peers i.e. themselves......but the one that was the object of "effection", whether that be an individual target or a group target, where any one member of that group can make claim to recompense

If only, maybe for future generations and moral technology

New word?


This is, at least by my measure of it.


:) a-ffection



: )

Have a great day!


Practice TEST - Me vs AnCapMercenary - I Accuse Him/Her

Let's test it right now.

AnCapMercenary submitted a post about Alex Jones and the Seattle Sound Cameras -- I posted a link about Alex Jones being a Disinformation Agent -- and posted a YouTube with a Radio interview where a guy points out all the times Alex Jones lied about 9/11 or Bill Cooper.

It was a relevant post: The interview is about someone who personally knows alex jones -- and if he IS a disinformation agent -- then we ABSOLUTELY SHOULD NOT be taking his little bread crumbs of truth. As I said on that page: Alex Jones has NEVER uncovered ANYTHING that astute YouTubers and Citizen Watchdogs haven't figured out and revealed on YouTube. So Alex Jones isn't essential - the question is:

Is he even LEGIT?

Do you know how AnCapMercenary Responded to my post ?
I offered substance. No adhom -- just substance. Did i get that in return ? No. I got the typical TROLL (worst case: SHILL) response:

He attempted to IMPUNE THE CHARACTER of Bill Cooper.

TRUE RON PAUL SUPPORTERS KNOW this lame tactic. And personally i can't stand it. How could a TRUE PAULER watch Ron Paul get marginalized by this tactic over and over and then use that SAME DECEPTIVE TACTIC to try to discredit someone else ? (AnCap was doing that to Bill Cooper in this instance)

We all know that people can be MASTERFUL in one are of their life, and yet DEFICIENT in another area of their life:

Oprah: Good with Money, Not so much with her weight.
Tesla: Great with Imagination/Invention, Not so much with people skills.

That's true for lots of math brains & numbers people too: Many of them are less skillful in other areas.

This is such a common understanding to anyone who pays attention to people, that to pretend this ISN'T the case is beyond ignorant -- i think it's deceptive.

So AnCap was given substance AGAINST Alex Jones -- and he responded by implying that Bill Cooper was INCOMPETENT or an outright LIAR simply because he claimed to have knowledge about government involvement with UFOs.So because of his UFO belief (which could be true) AnCap is asserting that Cooper is a nutcase, not just on that 1 topic, but on all topics he covers. See the flawed logic? And yet Cooper is of such sound mind and sound PRINCIPLED MORALS -- that he even brought a civil suit against the IRS in Arizona! Does Alex Jones take it to the government? No. He stands on corners SCREAMING THROUGH A BLOW HORN, which does little more than cause a distraction and provide VIDEO FODDER for his next "free" documentary.

What did the comments say on the other page? If something is FREE -- then YOU ARE THE PRODUCT.

Bill Cooper is a true patriot and he was murdered in his home by the County Sheriff's Dept while his local Police Dept. was left in the dark.

Any mild research easily vets Bill Cooper as being a Genuine Patriot, who loved his country and spread his knowledge as best as he could. And he had something important to say about Alex Jones.

AnCapMercenary follows the standard manipulation Playbook:

1. Alienate (by ridicule or by consensus): This is when someone insults you directly, or attempts to convey the idea that no one agrees with you, you're on your own - you're FRINGE -- like they did to Ron Paul every time he gave an interview: "So when are you going to run 3rd party? When are you going to give up?"
2. Label: "You conspiracy theorists are all the same." or "You FUNDIES don't understand logic." or as AnCapMercenary said to me: "There are only 2 factions against Alex Jones: The anti-zionists or the pro-zionists" -- if you read his sentence, it actually doesn't even make sense --- which is part 3:
3. Overwhelm/Confuse/Misdirect: The tactic here is to talk long enough that your attention span goes to sleep. They use some facts and the rest is nonsense - just to take up space -- waiting for you to get bored and tune out -- and then you'll just accept what they say as true because it's too much of a pain in the ass to unpack the shit they just shoveled onto your doorstep.

Example? Let's look at AnCapMercenary's response to me:

there seems to be really only two factions in the 'alternative research community' when it comes to this stuff and especially the 'anti-Alex Jones' crowd: those who are rabidly anti-zionist, vs. 'if you aren't rabidly zionist enough, then you must be a pro-Zionist, pro-NWO shill! shill! shill! I tell you!'

First he labels "alternative research community" -> as opposed to what? Something BETTER? Like People who get their news from the mainstream media ? Strike 1. Next part: he asserts there are 2 groups against Alex Jones: 1) Anti-Zionist or else you're with the Zionists and you're a shill! As he puts it....which is how a "rabidly Anti-Zionist" would put it, right? But then BOTH of those perspectives are from the Anti-Zionist group..... so he's accusing me of being Anti-Zionist....which is a strange claim since i made no reference to it at all.

But look how confusing his verbiage is. And that's the 3rd step of Manipulative Interaction.

FINALLY (Sorry for the length - but these fucks piss me off - and this is my shot to prove it) I gave AnCapMercenary the chance to prove me wrong by simply and clearly expressing his views on these LITMUS TEST TOPICS:

Explain Your Unique Perspective about These Events:

Sandy Hook
Boston Marathon

And Further: Would you ever vote for Hillary Clinton or an Establishment Republican ?
(you could argue Rand Paul is Establishment, but I would argue: Let's see if Goldman Sachs backs him, first, because i don't think they will. The political TV shows are already trying to marginalize Rand Paul: Chris Matthews put out a hit piece against him, AND the guests went SILENT when Rand Paul was brought up on Bill Maher's RealTime --> I think they're gonna push against him.)

Obviously I'm legit. I post about Ron Paul, Freedom -- I show the FAKERY of the False Flags. I was a Ron Paul Delegate in Illinois.

AnCapMercenary: He posts INTERVIEWS, most of which are ALEX JONES interviews -- he takes up space without divulging his personal stance on the major topics -- let's FORCE IT out.

Here's where i FIRST responded to his Pro Alex Jones Fear post:


And this is where I go hard again - and ask him to present his own ideas as PROOF of his authenticity here:
(he dodged it of course)

What say you??

Round 2 ? ?

I think "extra crispy" might ALSO be trolling -- why? Because he labeled 9/11 researchers as "TROOTHERS" and contradicted the 9/11 point of view that says: obviously the official story is bullshit.

OK Extra Crispy -- provide your unique perspective about 9/11.
You believe the official story?
You want to make excuses for Building 7, like Alex Jones did ?

These False Flags are LITMUS TESTS for the TROLLERS, not just because they disagree - but because of HOW they disagree.

Is your suggestion

in lieu of growing up and getting over it, which might take a little more maturity?

Great post Sam!

But don't forget, then they get their buddies to down vote your post.
I just upvoted this for you i hope the other adults on the site do the same. BTW have you ever heard of Divid Icke?

At the heart of his theories lies the idea that a secret group of reptilian humanoids called the Babylonian Brotherhood controls humanity, and that many prominent figures are reptilian.

You just can't make this shit up!

Well you should see the orgasm Alex Jones has when finally gets to meet his idol.


"Before we can ever ask how things might go wrong; we must first explain how they could ever go right"


Legal Injury, rhino-the-pawn, & DATA (VIDEO)

First Josf: Thanks for the good words. I think when we're talking about deception - the injured party is the one whom the deception is aimed and offered toward. In this case those Daily Paulers who are here for a genuine desire to read about and offer their perspective of the freedom movement are injured

by those who are NOT here for genuine purposes to participate in sincere discourse. Those like AnCap & 'extra crispy' they are engaging in an act of deception which results in people BUYING A PRODUCT THAT is NOT IN FACT how it is PRESENTED to be -- that's not legal.

What injuries result from such deception?

9/11 couldn't have happened with the aiding and abetting of disinformation pawns. Certainly there wouldn't have been follow-up false flags like Boston or LAX.

So I think what they're doing is helping to cover-up and propagate more of what has been infesting this country since the JFK hit.

You can't legally tell someone that they're buying a COKE when in fact -- and they only discover after they make their "purchase" (read: Decision, Vote) that they really got a PEPSI.

Pepsi can't legally do that, even over the $1 it costs to get a Pepsi.

To address RHINO, from below:
You're borderline brain-dead, or you're just another weak-minded PAWN. We're all SHILLS here ? WTF are you talking about? Most of us are not DECEPTIVELY HIDING our viewpoints and then making posts and spreading information in order to DECEIVE the rest of the community here into taking action that they wouldn't take if they had been given TRUE INFORMATION.

AnCap is good at what he does? Well if what "he does" is pretend to be a genuine, freedom-loving American Patriot -- then he's NOT good at it. I spotted him immediately. And I don't care what's beneath the surface of his agenda - He's disingenuous ON PURPOSE and I'm not sure that should be allowed, but it isn't my site.

Stop crying about it ?
Why don't you stop LYING about it.


To BillRow: The data IS more important than the source, and the DATA on Alex Jones tells us 2 things: He Lies & He's NON-ESSENTIAL and so do the Pawns on this site.

I already gave a perfect explanation for this:

ALEX JONES IS UNNECESSARY. He doesn't uncover ANYTHING that astute YouTubers and Citizen Watchdogs don't discover and post on their own.

Case in point: Bill Cooper was the first to warn people about the 9/11 & Patsy Bin Laden False Flag. And Alex Jones LIED about it, among many many many other things.

Observe, the DATA about Alex Jones in this video:



Again, this is about 1 thing: Should the DailyPaul allow Disinformation Pawns to corrupt this website which literally was a Bastion for TRUTH, FREEDOM, & Constitutional Awareness ?

The people hanging out in the chat rooms pushing Goldman Sachs candidate Ted Cruz, the people perpetuating Alex Jones Branded FEAR & Lies -- that doesn't hurt just this site -- because they're not just doing it on this site....

It's not my site, so it's not my call -- but i wonder how the website owners think/feel -- that's why i'm even bothering to bring this up -- I know this stuff on my own, I don't have to ring the bell about it -- I just didn't know if I was the only one who could see it, so.....

Can a MOD weigh in on this ?

Trial by volunteers (voluntary association)

Thanks Samuel_Washington for the volunteer work in defense of the innocent.

You wrote:


There is a great injustice done to us by past Trolls infecting present victims, whereby lies were effectively sold, once upon a time, and victims bought into those lies, and they passed those lies onto their children.

Chief among the lies is the concept of blind belief in falsehood without question.

So how can those who know better get in between the current criminals and the current innocent victims and avoid being caught up in the same lies?

Which is chief among the lies that are told, and purchased, whereby the lie is then believed by the victims to a point whereby not even the victims are questioning the lie?

I offer a competitive number one lie for your consideration:

Involuntary association (crime by any other name is still crime) must be employed so as to defend against Involuntary association.

In essence those who are intending to stand in between criminals and innocent victims become the criminals themselves.

That lie works well. That lie takes many forms, such as the often repeated Might makes Right demonic chant.

How about "war is good for the economy"?

How many examples bear repeating, as if no other possible choice exists other than Involuntary Association under a new False Flag periodically like some demonic business cycle?

So...not intending to become that which I supposedly abhor, the voluntary way might be to let the demons dig their own grave.

They announce what they do themselves, and they act out their crimes on their own false authority, so our job, it seems to me, is to try them, discover their crimes, and offer among ourselves the realization that they are what they are in fact, and therefore those who volunteer to avoid them can, because they are now known for what they are in fact.

The possibility is that once discovered, once announced, more and more people will choose not to, as you say, more and more people won't be BUYING A PRODUCT that is demonstrably criminal.

See that one over there?

Yes I see now.

Watch how that one, as if following a demonic script, resorts to deception.

Oh,yes,there it is, as if on cue.


So buttons on your underwear?

So...being serious for a moment...?

So I'm not buying lies anymore, thanks.

Does that sound reasonable?


I have to take a dump

does that sound reasonable?

I expect it will be nicely tapered on both ends.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

The data is always more important than the source.

Next is your ability to analyze the data. If you choose to value the source more than your ability to analyze the data then you've opted out of responsibility and lost all ability control your life.

"A vote for the lesser of two evils is a vote to keep things the same", Buckminster Fuller..
A choice for liberty is always a choice for liberty.


I tried to convey this point to someone else, after reading this point right here.

My effort went along the lines of failure to address the actual information offered and prejudging the information offered based upon the quality of the presentation, or the quality of the messenger, can result in acceptance of a lie well covered in a coating of sugar, and a result of rejection of a useful fact due to the opposite effect.

In other words:


“There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all argument, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance. This principle is contempt prior to examination.”


The answer is always simple.


"A vote for the lesser of two evils is a vote to keep things the same", Buckminster Fuller..
A choice for liberty is always a choice for liberty.


Thanks mucho


Samuel ...

Nothing is going to change. Nor should it.

We are all shills here.

We all have our roles. Here and everywhere else in our lives.

You have not even touched the surface of AnCap's true agenda, but it really doesn't matter.

He is good at what he does. So be better. Without crying about it.

You are a true asset to this site so carry on.

God Bless.

Good defense

My opinion is such that your defense of your offer of information concerning both Alex Jones and Bill Cooper is commendable and that AnCapMercenary's resort to deception is obvious; however who is the injured individual?

Bill Cooper spoke for himself while he was alive, and your defense of his good name is commendable, in my opinion.

Alex Jones is fully capable of defending his own name, as well as he has often exemplified how not to be a very good example of integrity in journalism.

I am at a loss in figuring out who is the injured individual, and that is very likely to be a case of my ignorance in this specific case.

I can tell you that I think you ought to consider volunteering as a common law grand juror since there are so many very evil people perpetrating so many very evil crimes under the color of law, and the efforts that you have exemplified on this forum, in my opinion, could serve a higher purpose defending the innocent against very evil people in the so called "government," that infests this country presently.

As to the Troll "extra crispy," the potential for innocent people injured by that Troll exists, in my opinion, but so far as I can tell his targeted victims are capable of defending themselves against his (or her) lies.

What must be established for there to be a trial according to the common law as I understand it, is an injured victim.

Who, exactly, is the injured victim in any case?

If you can identify the injured individual precisely, and then precisely report the extent of the injury, then a guilty party (presumed to be innocent) can be accused, and it is customary for the accused to be afforded a defense.

Does that sound reasonable?


"potential for innocent people being injured"

by my expressing a rather conventional and, by reference to established laws, easily supported opinions?

As opposed to - the potential for persons being injured by participating in the fake legal process which you admittedly are here trying to drum up support for. I dare say, that you are both spamming the forum with your links to your fake legal process, but are also suggesting persons participate in something which could be considered illegal (though usually it is just ignored and not prosecuted) as a counterfeit exercise of governmental authority.

Certainly - if you go so far as to ask the people you draw in for money to keep your "play jury" going once they commit, then you are doing more than just playing fake government, you're - as far as I'm concerned - defrauding people. People who are ignorant enough to think that the way you do things is the way they really work.

As an aside - has a "common law" or "citizens" grand jury ever succeeded? Just show me one example and I'll lighten up.

As a further aside - Please state your methods for ensuring fair jury selection.

As a further further aside - what state's laws do you apply, and how do you apply them? Is it based on emotion? Is caselaw even considered? If so, who considers it? Anyone with legal training involved?

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

Why stop now?

"As an aside - has a "common law" or "citizens" grand jury ever succeeded? Just show me one example and I'll lighten up."

Why would anyone ever want you to stop announcing to the world your guilty mind?

The more broadcasting done by destructive people the easier it will be for anyone to avoid contact with destructive people.

Look here, over here, I want so desperately to have contact with someone so as to destroy them, please?

I think such behavior is pathological. Be my guest, continue at your own cost.


so you know of no examples then?

got it. Pretty much what I thought.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

A few questions for Josf

since he/she is so in favor of regulating speech here at the Daily Paul:

1. If someone proposes that posters engage in conduct that could be illegal in some states, should that be allowed?

2. If someone proposes that a fake legal process is a real legal process, and tries to mislead other posters, should that be allowed?

3. If someone proposes that a scam be allowed to continue, from which persons are victimized, should that be allowed to continue?

4. If someone makes a substantive comment about the merits of a post, is one allowed to accuse the person of being a government agent? Or is that a form of trolling?

5. In what circumstances does one become a "Troll" as opposed to someone that disagrees with you?

6. Does majority rule matter when determining whether someone is trolling or stating an opinion that is unpopular at this site, or in a particular thread, or on a particular day?

7. Aren't libertarians supposed to be in favor of "no laws abridging freedom of speech?"

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

Bad news, chicken

You've been indicted:
"I would like to indict AnCapMercenary & extra crispy"

Please turn yourself in to the nearest citizen's grand jury where you will get a fair trial and a one dollar coupon for the Grand Slam breakfast.

I will not

I decree and hereby demand that IHOP take jurisdiction immediately! The Denny's near my house gives terrible service! Oh the injustice! Pass the syrup, please!

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

Very well

By the legal principle of de gustibus non est disputandum I decree and hereby demand and thereby direct that the jurisdictional priority of Denny's shall be quashed and heretofore quitclaimed, and the jurisdiction of IHOP shall prevail and shall persist. The guilty party shall present himself for trial and punishment forthwith.

Don't eat the syrup though, they only have that awful fake stuff that's all high fructose GMO corn syrup and artificial flavoring.

too late

I have already convened a peoples' peoples' grand jury of common common common law, which has ordered any and all proceedings initiated on internet forums as quashed and forever stalled due to the innate idiocy.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

I would suggest a venue change to the house of all you can

eat shrimp. The Red Lobster. Admiralty Law trumps all and is the homestead within the homestead.

Go BIG or go home.

Pass the garlic butter.


I have it on high authority that IHOP has fringe on its table cloths, which makes it a "de facto" admiralty jurisdiction courthouse, by virtue of Gibberish Code of Civil Procedure Section 122.58 (b)(7)(iii).

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

You win

This time. But only because I ran out of gibberish.

if you need more gibberish

there is a wealth of it here you can glean from.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

And if you need more gibberish than that

Here's a gibberish generator:

You can run any text through it. Gibberish generated from Hamlet sounds vaguely Shakepearian:

To die, the name of troubles, and makes calamity of troubles, and the native hue of the proud make arms against a sea of action devoutly to grunt and arrows of something after death, the dread off this regard thus the whips and to grunt and make with a bare bodkin? Who would fardels bear, to say we know not to sleep; to be, or to, 'tis nobler returns, puzzles the proud make arms against a sea of great under a weary life; fortune, or not of something after death what sleep; to be, or not of?

As they say, gibberish in, gibberish out:

But for that it can not only dictate whatever, if the government can not on a criminal case, but it can not on any evidence. That inadmitted. And if the justice or weight to their rightfully pertainly make it can certaining to a jury them to judge of fact; for, in a partial exhibition of fact; for them to the government can certainly dictate what force or weight is to a jury any laws of their right is, it pleases to judge of the laws of the law what is, it can dictate to judge of them to their right.

Fine works of gibberish

outstanding specimens. unrebutted.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein