Curt Doolittle

Category: Law, Constitution, and Jurisprudence

  • ON JURY NULLIFICATION —“Could you please offer your thoughts on Jury Nullifica

    ON JURY NULLIFICATION

    —“Could you please offer your thoughts on Jury Nullification, and how that might play out under P law?”—

    Nullifications in England, USA and Canada have a long history, and are dependent upon the character of the jury, and the character of the jury largely a matter of being a responsible middle class citizen, ad a middle class citizen on responsibility for property.

    —“Jury nullification, jury equity, or a perverse verdict occurs when members of a criminal or civil trial jury believe that a defendant is guilty, but choose to acquit the defendant anyway because the jurors also believe that the law itself is unjust, that the prosecutor or plaintiff, or judge has misapplied the law in the defendant’s case, or that the potential punishment for breaking the law is too harsh.”—

    So let’s list them again:

    … 1 – The Law itself is unjust,

    … 2 – The prosecutor(Plaintiff, Judge) has misapplied the law,

    … 3 – The punishment is too harsh for the crime.

    Nullification is at present a consequence of two rules of procedure within the law rather than a because it is explicitly encoded in the law:

    … a) Jurors cannot be punished for reaching a “wrong” decision.

    … b) A defendant who is acquitted cannot be tried again for the same alleged crime in front of another jury.

    In practical terms to prevent jury nullification,

    … a) prosecutors choose not to prosecute,

    … b) jurors are given a set of options and multiple ‘counts’ (crimes),

    … c) jurors are given instruction by the judge.

    The most effective is (b) since this is usually the source of concern.

    The open issue is the corrupt juror or jurors which originally was a common problem.

    In the P-Constitution jury nullification is embedded in the law.

    However,

    … 1) The unjustness of a law is easy to explain, demonstrate, and difficult to construct, and it is possible to prosecute those who attempt unjust laws before they can be acted upon.

    … 2) Misapplication of the law is easy to explain, and demonstrate.

    … 3) Excessive Punishment is open to debate, and in general should be a misapplication of the *degree* of the crime.

    So this means it is fairly easy for a juror or jurors to either (a) explain and defend their position on nullification (b) judge, juror or jurors to claim the resistant juror is engaged in contempt. (c) And it should be extremely difficult to make a fraudulent claim of nullification, (d) and extremely difficult for an unjust law to survive. What remains is (e) that the juror or jurors disagree on the interpretation of the facts of the case. (Good examples in the literature are common).

    In addition, police, plaintiffs, prosecutors, the judge, and members of the court are not free from prosecution for misrepresentation including overcharging including overcharging for the purpose of coercing the accused.

    THE PROBLEM

    The problem is preserving the high trust society that makes the jury system possible. it’s almost impossible to create. it’s extremely easy to destroy. And that is the reason for P-law. To defend it.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-25 19:04:00 UTC

  • OATH (n.) Old English að “oath, judicial swearing, solemn appeal to deity in wit

    OATH (n.)

    Old English að “oath, judicial swearing, solemn appeal to deity in witness of truth or a promise,” from Proto-Germanic *aithaz (source also of Old Norse eiðr, Swedish ed, Old Saxon, Old Frisian eth, Middle Dutch eet, Dutch eed, German eid, Gothic aiþs “oath”), from PIE *oi-to- “an oath” (source also of Old Irish oeth “oath”). Common to Celtic and Germanic, possibly a loan-word from one to the other, but the history is obscure.

    SALIC LAW (/ˈsælᵻk/ or /ˈseɪlᵻk/; Latin: Lex Salica), or Salian Law, was the ancient Salian Frankish civil law code compiled around AD 500 by the first Frankish King, Clovis. Recorded in Latin and in what Dutch linguists describe as one of the earliest known records of Old Dutch. it would remain the basis of Frankish law throughout the early Medieval period, influencing future European legal syste… See More

    COMMON LAW (n.)

    mid-14c., “the customary and unwritten laws of England as embodied in commentaries and old cases” (see common (adj.)), as opposed to statute law. Phrase common law marriage is attested from 1909.

    TESTIFY (v.)

    late 14c., “give legal testimony, affirm the truth of, bear witness to;” of things, c. 1400, “serve as evidence of,” from Anglo-French testifier, from Latin testificari “bear witness, show, demonstrate,” also “call to witness,” from testis “a witness” (see testament) + root of facere “to make” (see factitious). Biblical sense of “openly profess one’s faith and devotion” is attested from 1520s. Related: Testified; testifying; testification.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-25 12:22:00 UTC

  • What is Necessary for an optimum Government 0) A militia consisting of sharehold

    What is Necessary for an optimum Government

    0) A militia consisting of shareholders who reciprocally and unconditionally, insure one another’s property-in-toto from the involuntary imposition of costs by both members and non.

    1) A contract (constitution) between those shareholders for that reciprocal insurance, consisting of Rule of law, natural law, universal standing, universal applicability, absence of discretion through strict construction, with a monarchy as a judge (veto) of last resort. And providing for:

    2) A market for polities in which many small polities compete by the production of different commons. (btw: what polities will attract not only the most, but the best women?)

    3) A market for the production of commons within any given polity, by exchange between the classes (those with different reproductive strategies, capabilities, and capital interests)

    4) A Market for the production of goods and services within any given polity by exchanges between individuals and organizations OTHER than those that exclusively produce commons.

    5) A market for the production of generations (marriage) within any given polity, within any given market for commons, within any given market for production of goods, services, and information.

    6) A market for association and cooperation, within the market for polities, the market for commons, the market for private goods, the market for reproduction.

    7) A market for the resolution of disputes over property in toto by application and strict construction of the natural law of cooperation: reciprocity. (Judiciary)

    8) A market for the production of contracts (agreements) in all markets (lawyers)

    9) An insurer of last resort consisting of: A military of last resort, A treasury of last resort (shares in the nation), An insurer against acts of nature, age, and incompetence of last resort.

    Share this:

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-25 12:20:00 UTC

  • P IS JUST A METHOD. THE P-CONSTITUTION IS AN APPLICATION OUR APPLICATION IS INTO

    P IS JUST A METHOD. THE P-CONSTITUTION IS AN APPLICATION OUR APPLICATION IS INTOLERANT OF COMPETITION AGAINST THE PEOPLE. BUT IT”S STILL RULE OF LAW.

    —“P isn’t similar to NS, it just may seem like it in contrast to the madness of “liberal democracy”.”—Martin Štěpán,

    —“I think it is misleading to try to think of some ideology as ‘closest to P’. That way you end up thinking that P is similar to ‘whatever’ or ‘sort of whatever’. That surely isn’t the case, even tough there are/might be similarities with ‘whatever’.”—Jonne Klockars

    —“is not the whole point that it’s not an ideology at all?”–Crypto X

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-25 10:46:00 UTC

  • The Proper Place

    (war, law, faith) The faith is one player in a triumvirate of military(war), law, and faith. There is no place for law in war or faith, only in disputes between them. There is no place for faith in law or war, only in consolidation after them. There is no place for war in law or faith, only in our defense of them. This is our civilization; this has been our civilization for 5000 years.

  • The Proper Place

    (war, law, faith) The faith is one player in a triumvirate of military(war), law, and faith. There is no place for law in war or faith, only in disputes between them. There is no place for faith in law or war, only in consolidation after them. There is no place for war in law or faith, only in our defense of them. This is our civilization; this has been our civilization for 5000 years.

  • In P-law it’s not possible b/c of full accounting, and the tendency of law to co

    In P-law it’s not possible b/c of full accounting, and the tendency of law to coalesce on a single way of doing things.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-24 22:45:19 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1253817322575405064

    Reply addressees: @judicialist @ComicDaveSmith

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1253806331666055169

  • What if the court would not enforce non-payment of loans (only non payment of pu

    What if the court would not enforce non-payment of loans (only non payment of purchases). How would lender behavior change?

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-24 21:17:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1253795336340082695

    Reply addressees: @judicialist @ComicDaveSmith

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1253793681791991810

  • The Judgement of The Law – on The Left

    The Judgement of The Law – on The Left https://propertarianism.com/2020/04/24/the-judgement-of-the-law-on-the-left/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-24 19:01:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1253761113684140033

  • The Judgement of The Law – on The Left

    1. Reciprocity is the only reason for both sides to refrain from predation, parasitism, or boycott – cooperation or the option to cooperate is more valuable than non-cooperation, and the prevention of future cooperation.

    2. We create reciprocity via negativa by not imposing costs on others demonstrated interests

    3. The name we use for Demonstrated interests is property.

    4. In P-Law we use property in toto as the definition of property, meaning the empirical evidence of what demonstrated interests people defend.

    5. We are all dependent upon the informational commons for information.

    6. Some of us will defend the informational commons (or any commons) from other’s abuse of it. Some will not.

    7. When you make a truth claim to others, or others make a truth claim to you, the person making the claim can, if he errs, biases, justifies, or deceives, violates reciprocity with the audience (what we call unethical), causes you to harm the informational commons as a consequence (by externality), and if he makes that claim in public, harms the informational commons as well, and therefore violates reciprocity in the commons (what we call immorality).

    8. P-Law provides a definition of truth, and the means of falsifying (testing) statements for truthfulness by tests of testifiable, consistency, operational possibility, correspondence, rationality, reciprocity, completeness, full accounting, and possibility of warranty, and possibility of restitution upon error or deceit.

    9. Marxism, neo-marxism (cultural marxism), postmodernism, feminism, and hbd-denialism, are all attempts at deception by:

    (a) claiming european self determination (sovereignty, reciprocity), tripartism (military, legal-commercial), and religious(family-faithful), mediated by law, and limiting us to markets, so that we preserve natural selection by demonstrated behavior, and devoting the proceeds to the production of commons, thereby maintaining the health,prosperity, and wealth of the people, and their competitive advantage is oppression, when all other peoples that did not do so were mired in poverty and suffering.

    (b) that the solution was communism, or socialism, that would end our natural selection, our prosperity, and our competitive advantage, and our ability to drag mankind out of ignorance, superstition, poverty, hard labor, starvation, disease, suffering, and victimization by nature – when all civilizations that have tried any form of equality have died.

    (c) that to bring about communism, socialism, and the reversal of evolutionary transcendence, it was necessary to undermine our civlization at every level. Monopoly statism to undermine our tripartism. Atheism to undermine our tripartism. Anti-militarism to undermine our tripartism. Anti-rule of law to undermine not only our tripartism but the means by which we resolved disputes between the classes. Marxism to undermine the markets and cooperation between the classes. Cultural Marxism to undermine our culture, values, myths, traditions, and arts. Feminism to undermine the family as the compromise between the genders given our different reproductive strategies and biological differences. Postmodernism to undermine our ability to use social pressure to force conformity into realism, naturalism, operationalism, reciprocity, truthful speech, and defense of the commons so that it was optimu for the production of high trust citizenry; and again,postmodernism to deny the existence of truth or truthful speech – when truthful speech is the primary reason for not only our high trust society but our ‘european means of sense-making’ that made empiricism our laws, democratic participation, our science, medicine, and technology, possible. Postmodernism to use language for any purpose by which to obtain political power – abandoning all need for consistency, correspondence, rationality and liability. Political correctness to undermine the truth of the substantial differences between our advanced, neotenic, genetically, informationally, normatively, culturally, traditionally, and institutional superior people, so that they can be conquered quietly and slowly. Using immigration to reverse our darwinian history. Using frailty in our law and democracy to capture our territory and institutions. Using the academy to indoctrinate two generations of marxist-postmodernist-feminist-HBD-denialist “Priests and Priestesses” to indoctrinate our children by manufacturing their ignorance, feminizing our males, and making obese both genders. That’s only part of what they’ve done. I’ve just run out of tolerance for listing their crimes. JUDGEMENT OF THE LAW If the informational, normative, traditional, and institutional commons is common property of a people, then the (((anti-western left))) is an organized crime syndicate invading and conquering from within, in violation of the Westphalian peace. And as such these people are prosecutable for war crimes, and we shall have our restitution.