By Anna Von Reitz
People have asked me to comment on the Bundy related trial in Nevada and the jury's refusal to convict.
If everyone properly understood jurisdiction and their own country's history, they would know that the ongoing trial is in itself invalid and farce-like and that "US citizens" have no right to address these men or apply their "state of state" statutes to them in the first place.
When this all began the Bundys, if properly prepared, could have turned to the would-be Prosecutors and asked half a dozen questions, then walked away---- leaving their detractors and accusers to bite their own tongues. Or, as I observed to one who accosted me, "You know, you shouldn't even be talking to me. I haven't given you permission."
They are foreign to us.
Hello? Repeat --- they are FOREIGN to us.
Even though they speak the same language and may have been born in Little Rock, Arkansas, they are in a different foreign jurisdiction. They don't play by the same rules or follow the same law. So the next question is, why are we being accosted by them?
Because we are so dumbed down and ignorant that we don't even know who we are, don't know our political status, don't know enough to claim our birthright, don't bother to copyright our own names---so, of course, we also don't know that we belong to a different jurisdiction, are owed different courts, different juries, and different forms of law, either.
Bah, and humbug.... anyway, since we don't know our own butts from a hole in the ground, we get stuck being hauled into their courts and tried by juries who don't know anything more, different, or better than we do---- which in this case may account for why these cases were acquitted.
The juries are just as indoctrinated and ignorant as we are, so they continue to believe that US Citizens have constitutional guarantees and that rules of fair-play and justice apply in the courts and that common sense should rule the day.
For example, if this man didn't hurt anybody or destroy any property--- where's the crime he committed?
If he came to the aid of his neighbor against armed thugs who had no right to enter private property--- where is the crime?
You see, the jury members still think they are living in America, so they continue to act on the same assumptions as the people in the defendant's chair---much to the consternation of federal prosecutors everywhere.
This appears to be a case of jury nullification, where the jurors tried the statutory law and found it wanting, instead of the defendants. What else could it be, considering that the victims were not allowed to make any kind of defense and were railroaded throughout on the false presumption of 14th Amendment "citizenship"?
The facts in their favor, the misbehavior and bullying and threats of the federal agents, the wrong-headed presumptions of ownership interest by the federal corporations, the mismanagement of public lands in the western states by the BLM, the conspiracy of "county of county" sheriffs and federal agencies, all that and more wasn't allowed to be heard in the Defendant's favor.
So what is left?
The Jurors looked at the charges and realized they were Bushwah.
They realized that these were honest farmers and ranchers who hadn't done anything wrong according to American Law.
So they tossed out the suppositions and demands of the foreign statutory law on its ear.
Bully for them!
They might have done it in total ignorance, but hey, they did it.
So it doesn't matter if they were serving as jurors in a foreign court and under the false presumption that they were all US citizens. They did the right thing. They upheld the standards of American justice. And that is what counts.
If every juror and every jury in America did the same, it would not take very long at all for a quiet revolution to take place, as those jurors would one-by-one reject and require the replacement of the statutory laws in the same way that our land jurisdiction jurors can nullify any legislated law.
The jury is the law in America, and as long as we have jurors who have a clear sense of logic and justice and who can reason and weigh facts, the jury, however miscast and misdirected and misrepresented, remains our safeguard against tyranny and madness imposed by legislative acts. . . .
And judges like Gloria Navarro.
See this article and over 700 others on Anna's website here:www.annavonreitz.com
To support this work look for the PayPal button on this website.