Liberty Fight – by Martin Hill
“From 1770 to today, grand juries have investigated “willful misconduct in office by public officers”, issued indictments or “presentments” holding government agents accountable. When a LEGAL grand jury acts upon their full independent power to investigate, and tells a “protecting prosecutor” to “shut-up, sit down, and we will call you when we need you”, there is justice. Examples of accountability include the Rodney King situation, 5 NOPD officers during Katrina, and in Kentucky (2010), Whitley County Sheriff Lawrence Hodge. There are unique legal strategies to accomplish more with a grand jury. If you are from Council,Idaho and want to become involved in getting this case in front of a Grand Jury in Adams County which is the proper venue for this case contact me on Facebook here.
Kelly Z. Mordecai, Author – ‘The Hidden 4th Branch, a corrupt government’s worst nightmare.’
Here is the document in PDF format, or you can read the text below.
Petition for a LEGAL Grand Jury in Adams County, Idaho
Authoring a book about the grand jury to investigate corruption, I would like to help the people in Adams County. I would hope, that when empowered, the people of Adams County would “Petition” a Judge to convene a county grand jury. I write hoping for a grand jury investigation into the shooting death of Jack Yantis. I’ll start by writing about this power that the people hold, then a “strategy” most attorney’s don’t know.
POWER BY A STORY: On March 5th, 1770, in a colonial town an angry mob gathered on King Street. Soldiers were called in, then they shot and killed five colonials. The governor of Massachusetts ordered the soldiers arrested. Within three weeks, a grand jury issued an indictment against nine British Soldiers. History recalls this as the “Boston Massacre.” A trial commenced upon the defendants – the nine indicted British Soldiers. The defense attorney was a young man, who would later become president. His name was John Adams. The result: Two of the commanders were given the death sentence. John Adams commented, “It was a dirty business, but the jury got it exactly right.” (paraphrased.) The other seven soldiers were acquitted because they were following orders.
The grand jury of Boston investigated on their own mostly, and had some help from a prosecutor. That was the intent of the grand jury from ages past in England.
Why bring this up? Because the grand jury was, and still is the main investigating body, and not the prosecutor. This occurred rather swiftly in Boston because the grand jury knew their full power, their duty, and their responsibility to society. The goal of the grand jury was determining “Probable Cause.” Should “Probable Cause” be found either by a “Presentment”, or an “Indictment”, then the accused is sent to trial.
This power of the grand jury to investigate has not been diminished since the Boston Massacre. In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court has only affirmed this power.
However, when prosecutors walk in and “Assume” to be “In Control” of the grand jury, then the grand jury has been stripped of their full power. Who is in charge then? Is it the prosecutor, or the grand jury foreman? Answer: The Grand Jury Foreman.
This is how justice will commence …. When an Adams County grand jury asserts their full power and tells the prosecutor to shut-up, sit-down, and we will call you when we need assistance. Or possibly demand from the judge “independent counsel.” (Hawaii allows the grand jury to call its own “independent counsel” when they believe the prosecutor is biased, or withholding evidence.) Then the grand jury issues subpoenas. In short, prosecutors are helpful to a grand jury, are at times needed, but should never take control of the grand jury proceedings, nor the investigation. This “manipulation” by a prosecutor creates a travesty when a rogue government agent commits a crime, then is protected by the prosecutor manipulating a grand jury. One specific way they do this is excluding a witness (or two) or evidence from the grand jury.
This is a very serious travesty of justice when a prosecutor or a judge manipulates a grand jury. Former US Senator Ted Kennedy got away with murder at Chappaquiddick because the judge sealed the evidence. The prosecutor explained to the grand jury that without evidence, no indictment could occur. No indictment, prosecution came to a screeching halt. In fact, the 5th Amendment actually protects someone without a grand jury presentment or indictment. Neither the JFK assassination, nor the 911 attacks were investigated by a federal grand jury. Hmmmm…. Shortly after 911, the White Plains Grand Jury of New York got started investigating 911, but they were visited by the Justice Department. The Justice Department told the grand jury they would investigate. So the grand jury disbanded. In both of these travesties, lame “commissions” came out with reports that have since been questioned, and not fully trusted by the American People. Is there any wonder why it is so important for the prosecutor to manipulate the grand jury, when protecting a corrupt ally? By grand jury manipulation, end it there.
Another trick a federal prosecutor can pull, when desperate to protect corruption is say to the grand jury, “Well, the grand jury voted indictment, but it is invalid unless I sign it. I won’t sign it citing U.S. vs. Cox (1964).” At that instant, the grand jury must rebel against the prosecutor and write their own “Presentment”, then file this in open court. A “Presentment” does not require the signature of prosecution. Some states allow for a grand jury to write and file an “Information.”
These “games” by prosecution can be so severe, that attorney Montgomery Sibley observed these, and wrote a scathing statement in legal pleadings filed with a federal court, “Simply stated, by statute, rule and case law, the Grand Jury has been emasculated in what can only be viewed as an absolute coup d’etat upon the Grand Jury by the federal government.”
However, this manipulation is not how it should be. The grand jury is independent, and should investigate despite being misadvised by the prosecutor before them. The U.S. Attorney Manual (Department of Justice) states to the “prosecutor”, that when in front of the grand jury, “The prosecutor must recognize that the grand jury is an independent body.” USAM Chapter 9-11.010 – Introduction. What? Yes, even the Justice Department knows that the grand jury is an independent body. How independent? The U.S. Supreme Court has spoken:
United States v. Williams, 504 U.S. 36 at 48 (1992), Justice Scalia commented: “‘[R]ooted in long centuries of Anglo-American history,” Hannah v. Larche, 363 U.S. 420, 490 (1960) (Frankfurter, J., concurring in result), “the grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the branches described in the first three Articles. ‘[It] is a constitutional fixture in its own right.’”United States v. Chanen, 549 F.2d 1306, 1312 (CA9 1977) (quoting Nixon v. Sirica, 159 U.S. App. D.C. 58, 70, n. 54, 487 F.2d 700, 712, n. 54 (1973)), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 825 (1977).
“In fact, the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional Government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people. See Stirone v. United States, 361 U.S. 212, 218 (1960); Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43, 61 (1906); G. Edwards, The Grand Jury 28-32 (1906). Although the grand jury normally operates, of course, in the courthouse and under judicial auspices, its institutional relationship with the Judicial Branch has traditionally been, so to speak, at arm’s length. Judges’ direct involvement in the functioning of the grand jury has generally been confined to the constitutive one of calling the grand jurors together and administering their oaths of office. See United States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338, 343 (1974); Fed.Rule Crim.Proc. 6(a). [504 U.S. 36, 48] “
Leo Denofrio a retired attorney coined the phrase of the grand jury as the “4th Branch of government.” In a 1906 landmark case, Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43 (1906) the U.S. Supreme Court wrote that the grand jury was not only capable of proceeding on what they knew (without a prosecutor), the grand jury was independent. It was never created for the courts or the prosecutor.
“Under the practice in this country, the examination of witnesses by a Federal grand jury need not be preceded by a presentment or formal indictment, but the grand jury may proceed, either upon their own knowledge or upon examination of witnesses, to inquire whether a crime cognizable by the court has been committed, and, if so, they may indict upon such evidence.” (Emphasis added) ……
“The grand jury have the undoubted right to send for witnesses…”
“…It has been alleged that grand juries are confined in their inquiries to the bills offered to them, to the crimes given them in charge, and to the evidence brought before them by the prosecutor. But these conceptions are much too contracted; they present but a very imperfect and unsatisfactory view of the duty required from grand jurors and of the trust reposed in them. They are not appointed for the prosecutor or for the court; they are appointed for the government and for the people; (Emphasis added)
In Hale vs. Henkle, the court referenced a previous case, Frisbie v. United States, 157 U. S. 160, (1895) where Justice Brewer wrote: “But, in this country, it . . . is for the grand jury to investigate any alleged crime, no matter how or by whom suggested to them, and, after determining that the evidence is sufficient to justify putting the party suspected on trial, to direct the preparation of the formal charge [presentment] or indictment.”
Notice, I’m going back in time with these court cases. It is important to see the thinking of judges in the late 1700’s, near the intent of the grand jury investigating and indicting (or presenting) the soldiers of the 1770 Boston Massacre. Here is a charge to a grand jury by a federal judge in 1795:
“As this is a point of law in which the rights of man are deeply interested, I shall detain you one minute longer, was this territory to be honored with a visit from our illustrious and well beloved President [George Washington] who is known to have a soul elevated above all that is mean; nevertheless as he is human and it is the lot of humanity to err; suppose he should fall beneath himself as to strike, beat, wound and commit a violent battery on the body of a poor citizen, while you were sitting and within your knowledge, would it not be your duty to make a presentment? Certainly it would, if you did not, he might pity you as men; but as cowards he would despise you.”
Judge William Goforth, NW Territory, 1795
Many states have specific statutes stating that grand juries should investigate, “Willful misconduct in office by public officers.” For example the California Penal Code calls out a similar phrase in P.C. §919(c), as “..the grand jury to inquire into the willful or corrupt misconduct in office of public offers of every description within the county.” California took it a step further to exclude the prosecutor from the grand jury in situations of murder by a peace officer. This was recently passed in Senate Bill – SB227. Now if a Ferguson Missouri situation occurs in California, (man killed by the police), only the grand jury can investigate the crime. No prosecutor.
The Missouri Constitution in Article I §16 goes further to state, “…. [the] grand jury shall have power to investigate and return indictments for all character and grades of crime; and that the power of grand juries to inquire into the willful misconduct in office of public officers, and to find indictments in connection therewith, shall never be suspended. “
Who would want to “suspend”, or deceive a grand jury? A prosecutor before the grand jury trying to protect his government friend. Or possibly a judge not wanting to convene a grand jury. Thus the Missouri Constitution made it clear that this power shall never be suspended.
Arizona: The responsibility of a grand jury to investigate corruption is summarized best by statements from an Arizona state supreme court chief justice, “A county grand jury is responsible for investigating possible public offenses, including corrupt or willful misconduct in office by public officials …[and] …return a criminal indictment or true bill, formally accusing someone of a crime…….
…….The powers and duties of the state grand jury are similar to those of the county grand jury, except they extend statewide.” (emphasis on corrupt government officials.)
Rebecca White Berch – Chief Justice of the Arizona Supreme Court.
The Idaho Statutes, (Title 19, Chapter 10) charge the Foreman to investigate! 19-1011. OATH OF FOREMAN. The following oath must be administered to the foreman of the grand jury: You, as foreman of the grand jury, will diligently inquire into and true presentment make, of all public offenses against the state of Idaho, committed or triable within this county, of which you shall have or can obtain legal evidence. A public offense would be… murder. Notice it does not read that the prosecutor is to “diligently inquire into”? Strategy to Convene a Legal Grand Jury
First of all, please do not be upset with judges or attorneys for ignorance. They may not know that the “sword function” of the grand jury is to investigate, “Willful misconduct in office by public officers.” Law schools hardly teach about the Constitution, much less the grand jury. The judge does have the power to convene a county grand jury in Adams County, even a 2nd grand jury (Idaho Criminal Procedure §19-1015.) How would the people request this?
- #1: Find a Legal Researcher in or near Adams County. Not an attorney, unless they love the Constitution. I will be pleased to assist this person by helping them be aware of this power and a “strategy.” I hope that the researcher is local.
- #2: Develop a “Petition” – where the facts of the situation are presented, in letter form, with attachments and affidavits.
- #3: Gather signatures that you want a grand jury convened by a county judge.
- #4: Submit the Petition to the Court: The historical origin of a “Petition” is to a grand jury. The “Right to Petition” a grand jury is affirmed in Borough of Duryea v. Guarnieri (No. 09-1476), (2011) , Adderly vs. Florida,385 U.S. 39 (1966) and codified in the first amendment to the United States Constitution. This places the judge in a position to seriously consider honoring your request of “Petition.”In this “Petition”, request an Adams County Judge to Convene a Grand Jury (Note a few states (Kansas and Oklahoma) require a judge to convene a grand jury when enough petition signatures are gathered.)
- #4: Anticipate that the Judge won’t convene one. Go to the local paper when they don’t. (The pressure from the press may cause reconsideration due to the next election. Invite the press with you to the 1st court hearing. Prep the press ahead of time. This might be a “juicy” news story for them to cover.)
- #5: Try again, or appeal.
- #6: Include in the “Petition” the power and duty of grand juries to take the lead in the investigation. (Maybe include excerpts from this document.)
- #7: Be Ready: Once an Adams County Grand Jury is convened, be ready for a prosecutor to manipulate a grand jury.
There are other “strategy items” that can’t be discussed here, as well as details of the above. (You don’t want your opposition to know what you are doing.)
To Start: To start, I’m looking for a legal researcher in or near Adams County to get this process started. I’m available for discussion. Friend me or “PM me” on facebook.
Summary: With the Boston Massacre, the grand jury was an instrument of peace, by investigating and sending murderers to trial; from this a conviction. With some situations, a grand jury investigating thoroughly can show “self-defense”, and bring peace to a situation. In either way, when a grand jury is fully empowered, then investigates on its own, with a thorough investigation, then provides a “Presentment”, an “Indictment”, or an “Information”, with good explanation, the end result is peace through justice.
Fiat Justitia Ruat Coelum*
Kelly Z. Mordecai – Author, The Hidden 4th Branch, a corrupt government’s worst nightmare. (A book about the grand jury, available on Amazon.com) * Latin, meaning, “Let justice be done though the heavens fall.”
Disclaimer: This is not intended to be legal advice. Reader is encouraged to research and confirm this information. This was written free of charge with no expectation of financial compensation. Note to Civil Attorneys: Should a grand jury indictment occur, then a trial court convicts the accused, your chances of winning a civil case increase greatly.
http://libertyfight.com/2015/grand_jury_proposed_for_jack_yantis_killing.html