Do Juries have the absolute power to nullify bad laws?

This (jury nullification) is one of the few peaceful ways that remain to attempt some justice and resolution of the many problems in the system. However, most of what I have seen on the subject seems to imply something less than a complete understanding of the system these clever BAR members have set up.

It is absolutely true that under the common law and in a court of "law" the people make the law and the decision of the jury of the people cannot be appealed or overruled. Their decision is final as the people are the highest authority. It is with that vote that usurpation of power by over zealous legislatures and prosecutors are held in check. It is/was perhaps the most important power/vote of the people.

That said, the above is not what actually exists in this country at present. That is not to say that a juror cannot act to nullify or hang a jury over a bad law, for most assuredly they can attempt to do so even in today's courts. It is not legal by the corporate definition of procedure, but they aren't likely to challenge it openly because it would run the risk of exposing their fraud.

I do think, however, that it might be good to also understand the reality of the system and what they are doing. 

First, these are no longer courts of law. They are administrative courts conducting administrative hearings dealing with corporate business. Call them private courts dealing with private, closed society, corporate internal affairs. Inside that private closed society they have jurisdiction only over the members of their closed society or corporate employees/affiliates/ franchisees. They are dealing in their commercial corporate policies and not LAW.

They are holding administrative hearings regarding corporate business....corporate policies. They often refer to it as "public policy" but they are using and administering private copyrighted rules they called by various names such as "code", "statutes", "Acts", and public policy, but all are "color of law" used to administer corporate affairs.

The court administrator is no longer a judge but merely an administrator of corporate business and conflicts between corporate entities....internal affairs, if you will. They do not argue the law or discuss the law, they only consider the "facts". The administrator often tells the jury that he/she will "tell the jury what the law is" and that is because they are determining corporate policy and the "law" or policy is whatever they say it is. 

But what of the jury?

Well, if you look at a jury summons I believe you will find that somewhere on there it "qualifies" a potential juror as a "U.S. citizen". That means little to most people and, if anything, most people consider themselves special or privileged because they believe themselves to be a U.S. citizen. Without question they mark the summons accordingly claiming that "status". It IS special, but nothing like people think it is.

Interestingly, you will find that you can neither sit upon one of their juries nor vote if you select the option that you are not a U.S. citizen. That is proof positive that you are dealing with an exclusive society in which only members may participate. If you are a "member" of the closed private society you are also "subject" to it as per the 14th amendment. That means you have exchanged rights for "privileges and immunities". 

The point is that, if you claim to be a U.S. citizen, you have forfeited your right to nullify and become "subject to" their rule by fiat corporate policy as you are a participating member of the commercial corporate scheme and claiming to be a member or citizen is evidence of your participation by your own claim. 

If you make the claim and sit on one of "their" juries you are no longer a common law juror but serving only in an "advisory" capacity for the administrator. The administrator can, and often does, punish jurors and most certainly makes attempts to control them in many ways. You "subject" to it yourself by claiming to be subject to him/her in claiming the status of U.S. citizen and the privilege to sit in their jury box. Such behavior by a judge is not possible in a true court of law.

On the other hand, if you select that you are NOT a U.S. citizen on their forms then you are not "qualified" to serve on their juries. In a very real sense, this prevents a sovereign American, seeking justice according to the common law, from being able to seat a truly impartial jury, actually argue the law, or to obtain justice and a fair hearing. 

Frankly, with very few exceptions, it must be acknowledged that most U.S. citizens are completely unfamiliar with the law, are likely to let an administrator TELL them what their law is, and their opinions are seriously tainted with their own brainwashed views of what should be law. 

Those are basically the underlying circumstances which exist. With that said, can a juror select that they are a U.S. citizen on the summons and then act to nullify bad laws by hanging the jury or blocking a conviction? Yes. Why, because, in the vast majority of cases the court, prosecutor, and the system as a whole prefer NOT to expose the truth about what is going on or why.

My personal suspicions are that if the nullification becomes to big a thorn in their side that they will do more plea bargains, avoid using juries more than they already do, start cracking down on jurors, and various other devices to counter the problem short of exposing the truth.

I do not discourage the practice of nullification. As I stated previously, it is perhaps one of the few remaining methods of peaceful change. 

The really diabolical aspect to their system and to our miseducation is the many repercussions one faces as a result of providing them with prima facie evidence of one's political status by claiming to be a U.S. citizen subject. Most people think the claim merely differentiates them from illegal aliens, but that is far from the truth.

Americans are not illegal aliens, nor is "U.S. citizen" synonymous with American. The status of U.S. citizen is a political status and a title, or term, given to a member of the closed commercial corporate society created in the 1800's. It does allow corporate privileges and the commercial system does exclude people who refuse claim of membership or of the status.  

Most know about "voter registration" and may now be aware of the jury summons question, but a careful check of most every document one completes in the system asks the question or questions...are you a U.S. citizen and/or do you "reside WITHIN THE UNITED STATES? One would do well to learn the meaning of those "terms" because, as they are being used, they mean something entirely different that the average man would ever suspect.

The IRS is but one of many agencies which use such things as a completed jury summons to establish prima facie evidence of your U.S. citizenship which makes you "subject to" their jurisdiction. 

My point is that serving on the jury is a catch 22. Be FULLY INFORMED above all else.

neo

The Grand Jury Answer for corruption in Government in America

The powers that be don't want you to know this!
They fear that if you know this you will throw them in jail for breaking their oath of office, to the US Constitution.

Just to make sure you understand this, the following is a Supreme Court Justice writing the majority opinion for a case from 1992 that throws out the notion that a Grand Jury is part of government or any branch thereof. It's NOT. The Grand Jury belongs to We the People. No prosecutor or judge has control over a Grand Jury once properly called, and no body of government can stop the people from calling one, regardless of code, statute, or even a Constitution of a State. Why?  Because when the states became states they accepted the US Constitution as it is below explained.
Paul

United States v. Williams, 112 S.Ct. 1735, 504 U.S. 36, 118 L.Ed.2d 352 (1992)
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/504/36


NEW YORK IS “GROUND ZERO” - Major grassroots movement in 48 States, Constituting Common Law Grand Juries. In a stunning six to three, 1992 Decision that went unnoticed, until now, Justice Antonin Scalia writing for the majority said:

In the Supreme Court case of United States v. Williams, 112 S.Ct. 1735, 504 U.S. 36, 118 L.Ed.2d 352 (1992), Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, confirmed that the American grand jury is neither part of the judicial, executive nor legislative branches of government, but instead belongs to the people. It is in effect a fourth branch of government "governed" and administered to directly by and on behalf of the American people, and its authority emanates from the Bill of Rights, the acts of the Grand Jury is the consent of the people.
“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. 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”. -- Justice Antonin Scalia
“Thus, citizens have the unbridled right to empanel their own grand juries and present "True Bills" of indictment to a court, which is then required to commence a criminal proceeding. Our Founding Fathers presciently thereby created a "buffer" the people may rely upon for justice, when public officials, including judges, criminally violate the law.” --
Justice Antonin Scalia
“The grand jury is an institution separate from the courts, over whose functioning the courts do not preside, we think it clear that, as a general matter at least, no such "supervisory" judicial authority exists. The "common law" of the Fifth
Amendment demands a traditional functioning grand jury.” -- Justice Antonin Scalia
“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. The grand jury's functional independence from the judicial branch is evident both in the scope of its power to investigate criminal wrongdoing, and in the manner in which that power is exercised.”
-- Justice Antonin Scalia
“The grand jury 'can investigate merely on suspicion that the law is being violated, or even because it wants assurance that it is not.' It need not identify the offender it suspects, or even "the precise nature of the offense" it is investigating.
The grand jury requires no authorization from its constituting court to initiate an investigation, nor does the prosecutor require leave of court to seek a grand jury indictment. And in its day-to-day functioning, the grand jury generally operates without the interference of a presiding judge. It swears in its own witnesses and deliberates in total secrecy.” -
- Justice Antonin Scalia
“Recognizing this tradition of independence, we have said the 5th Amendment's constitutional guarantee presupposes an investigative body 'acting independently of either prosecuting attorney or judge” -- Justice Antonin Scalia
“Given the grand jury's operational separateness from its constituting court, it should come as no surprise that we have been reluctant to invoke the judicial supervisory power as a basis for prescribing modes of grand jury procedure. Over the years, we have received many requests to exercise supervision over the grand jury's evidence-taking process, but we have refused them all. "it would run counter to the whole history of the grand jury institution" to permit an indictment to be challenged "on the ground that there was incompetent or inadequate evidence before the grand jury." -- Justice
Antonin Scalia

_______________________

This is the answer folks. This is the way to stop Obama, and every unlawful breach of oath of office in the entire country WITHOUT BLOODSHED. 
You already have these rights and powers. You don't need to spend any money, or elect new people to office, or pass any new laws, and whatever contradicts this is NULL AND VOID even if it's written in code or statute or even a state constitution like in Montana.

Here is the basis for that:

"All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." Marbury Vs. Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803). "Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda Vs. Arizona, 384 US 436 p. 491. " An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed." Norton Vs. Shelby County 118 US 425 p. 442

We don't have to beg these corrupt lawyers and government officials to let us investigate them!

The supreme court says so. WE OWN THE GRAND JURY!

http://www.paulstramer.net/2012/11/what-is-really-law-and-what-is-not-law.html

More will be coming on this subject, and I invite you to comment below. Just click where it says comments.

Finally, proper use of the Citizens Grand Jury

WHITE HOUSE BLASTED FOR CLASSIFIED INFORMATION LEAKS

by a citizens Grand Jury in Ocala Florida.

http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/white-house-blasted-for-classified-information-leaks/

In the 1990s U.S. v. Williams ruling, the Supreme Court determined the federal courts lack the authority to require a prosecutor to present specific information to a grand jury, Klayman explained.

The opinion rejected the argument that the concept of “checks and balances” allows a court to “exercise supervisory power over grand jury proceedings.” Therefore, Klayman told WND, the citizen grand jury is considered the ideal vehicle to bypass all of the political attachments of the judiciary and cut to the chase in evaluating a president’s actions.

“Justice Antonin Scalia held … that the grand jury’s functional independence from the judicial branch is evident both in the scope of its power to investigate criminal wrongdoing and in the manner in which that power is exercised. Unlike [a] court, whose jurisdiction is predicated upon a specific case or controversy, the grand jury can investigate merely on suspicion that the law is being violated, or even because it wants assurance that it is not,” he wrote.

Citizen's Grand Jury to Investigate Obama Administration

Now we might get some action.

OBAMA ADMIN'S 'LOOSE LIPS' UNDER INVESTIGATION

Members of a “citizens’ grand jury” will meet next week in Ocala, Fla., to look at allegations that the “loose lips” of the Obama administration led to the deaths of dozens of members of the U.S. military and the imprisonment of a Pakistan physician who helped locate Osama bin Laden – all to “bolster” the “political agendas” of President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden.

Read more here:  http://www.wnd.com/2012/10/obama-admins-loose-lips-under-investigation/

Dr. Sam Kennedy or is it Richard Glenn Unger

NOW Read the other side of the coin.  HOW FAR WILL THEY GO to trap us into jail?

If you have been following the radio show on republicbroadcasting.org called Take No Prisoners and you wonder like I have about whether this is a legitimate approach, or you wonder how far the government might go to expose real patriots to criminal charges and possible jail time you need to read the COMMENTS section below the main articles on the following page.

http://loveforlife.com.au/node/3694

http://loveforlife.com.au/node/4117

Scroll down the page below the main articles and documentation and read comments by the readers of the blog about the research done into who "Dr. Sam Kennedy" is. 
Remember that I said NOT to do anything with the material except read or listen for education.  Many people have come forward over the years with this same type of material, claiming to have a solution to the corporate government problem. None of them have any enforcement behind them even IF they are entirely correct in their assesment of history and the methods used by our enemies to subvert the Republic form our government is supposed to be.

There is a long history of subversion, starting by the changes in the meaning of words in old dictionaries. More on that later. Suffice it to say so far there is no enforceable solution at this point, but understanding where these people are coming from is critical to understanding where we need to go to solve the problem.

I won't dwell on this, but two people who showed up at our LCW meetings some time back expounded some of these same ideas, and Leroy Schweitzer had also discovered some of these subversive elements and was talking about them. Are these the reasons most of these people are in jail now? Are they getting too close to the truth, and therefore have to be silenced? Has the government picked up on that and are they now sending in agents of their own trying to subvert the movement and entice patriots into doing something "illegal" so they can put them away?
Now you understand why I have never been a FREEMAN. Now you might understand why I have never attempted to recind any of my contracts with their corporate system. Now you might understand why I have remained a 14th Amendment citizen, subject, slave like you. Now you might see why I continue to tell you the truth and give you the evidence so you can make your own decisions based on something real.
Now you might understand how easy it is to be led off track with these things.
"Those who refuse to learn from history are condemned to repeat it."

http://loveforlife.com.au/node/3694

Why did I put the radio show on the blog and website? 

Just like I said, for educational purposes.
I want my readers to know that most of what these people are saying is based on some real true event or some code or statute that was used to defraud We The People of our freedom.
The documentation is there to support their conclusions, but their recommended solutions may be full of holes. For example, when they say that somebody high in the military will step in and back them up, you should see a red flag, and common sense says that the military should come forward and be identified before you take any action. At least it does for me. My challenge all along to these people has been for them to make this enforceable. If they are right their program should be enforceable right down to the county level.

I doubt that many of my readers took the time to read the bibliography below the original article here:
http://www.paulstramer.net/2010/01/is-military-fed-up-with-treason-in.html
Scroll down and follow the links and read some of the laws and events.

It's very revealing and solid that the basis for this school of thought about corporate VS Je-jure jurisdiction is based on real events that were rooted in fraud in our history. The notion that we changed from a Federal union of independent states, into an "nation" is well founded in those events. But the solution to that dilema is not so easy to arrive at, since the corporation is being enforced by all the courts, regardless of how fraudulent  and repugnant to the Constitution that might be. This is why the courts come back with the reason for not hearing arguments like Obama's eligibility by saying "you have no standing".  A 14th Amendment citizen subject is not a party to the Constitution according to these courts, because of our "contracts with the corporation" of UNITED STATES, which is completely different from the Federal United States.

SO WHAT IS THE ANSWER AND SOLUTION?

Is the answer contained in the Jury system? Is the 4th check and balance OF THE JURY SYSTEM the solution? There are those that think that is exactly the easiest and most immediate solution available without risk of charges and jail, or bloodshed.  I wholeheartedly agree.
The jury system is already contained in the laws of most every State.
The Grand Jury has been for the most part suppressed by the "nationalists" because they realized it's power a long time ago. They know that a standing grand jury has the power to subpoena, and investigate, and then indict agents of government who have subverted our Republic form of government using fraud and deceit.

http://americangrandjury.org/history_power.html

They also know that a trial (petit) jury has the power to refuse to apply a code or statute to a particular set of facts, thereby nullifying bad laws, as they did with prohibition, and the fugitive slave act among many others.

http://fija.org/document-library/essays-editorials/

http://fija.org/document-library/

The jury solution is available right now. No lobbying is needed to pass any new laws. No elections need to be won. No large sums of money need to be spent on political campains. You already have your tremendous jury rights and powers. All that is needed is for you to understand these rights, powers, and duties.

Come to our Lincoln County Watch meetings on the first and third Saturday of each month at noon in the Senior Center in Eureka or go to our website at http://www.lincolncountywatch.org/

Then get involved in the educational effort to spread the word about jury rights and duties and help give the American People hope and real information on how they can turn this around and boost FREEDOM.
 For more information call 800 889 2839 or email  pstramer@eurekadsl.net

LEGAL NOTICE: The Authors specifically invoke the First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and of the press, without prejudice, on this website. The information posted on this website is published for informational purposes only under the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution for the United States of America. Images, text and logic are copyright protected. ALL rights are explicitly reserved without prejudice, and no part of this website may be reproduced unless by written consent. You hereby have written consent to post any individual post from this website containing this copyright to any other blog or email only if you post the whole and unaltered article including this copyright, and give proper credit to the author, and a link back to this blog at http://www.paulstramer.net/. This applies only to articles written by Paul Stramer. ©2005-2009 by Montana Business Communications (PDS) All rights remain in force. Removing this notice forfeits all rights to recourse. Copyright strictly enforced © The videos are third party and not covered by this legal notice.

The Grand Jury, An Idea whose time has come.

Jay Stevens writes in the blog "Left in the West" trying to discredit the Grand Jury, which we will show has a very good history in the USA for many decades before it became controlled by prosecutors.
Here is his article:
http://leftinthewest.com/diary/3680/citizens-grand-jury-an-idea-whose-time-has-come

His article was prompted by Duane Sipe's article here:
http://montanaconservative.wordpress.com/2009/11/12/update-on-the-montana-grand-jury/

Mr. Stevens is right about one thing. "I know some among my circle of progressive friends are a little nervous about conservatives wanting to create a "citizen grand jury" for Montana,...."  Progressives are nervous about this proposal. Why is that?

They only need to be nervous if they have something to hide that would be unlawful. Otherwise they should welcome the chance to testify or maybe bring complaints to the Grand Jury. The Grand Jury is there to preserve the rule of law, and stop the rule by men sitting in positions of power, making the rules as they go.  The highest law that needs to be preserved is the Constitution FOR the United States.
“All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.” Marbury vs. Madison 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803)
The Constitution includes "privacy in their persons, papers, houses and effects".
Mr. Stevens evidently wants you to believe that a Grand Jury would make all your private business and personal information available to the public. Not true.

Here is a great explanation of the Grand Jury. http://www.fija.org/docs/JG_on_the_grand_jury.pdf
Is it the "protection of the citizenry from unfounded criminal charges” (USAM, Section 9-11.010)", part of the US Attorney's manual, that Mr. Stevens is objecting to?

An independent grand jury is to “stand between the prosecutor and the accused,” and to determine whether a charge is legitimate, or is “dictated by malice or personal ill will” (Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43 (1906)). The grand jury is to protect citizens against “hasty, malicious and oppressive persecution” and to insure that prosecutions are not “dictated by an intimidating power or by malice and personal ill will” (Wood v. Georgia, 370 U.S. 375 (1962)).

Mr. Stevens says "Heck! And you can present all kinds of weak evidence that makes the defendant look guilty in the court of public opinion!"

I ask, isn't that already happening in the justice courts?  I know of several JP court justices that seem to think an order of protection is the remedy for absolutely everything. They slam the gavel and issue an order that makes the responder look guilty of all kinds of crimes on just the sayso of the complainant without ever requiring the person complaining to provide any evidence, photos, afidavits, witnesses, or any proof whatsoever, and all this without benefit of any jury of their peers. These JP judges deny the respondent the ability to call any witnesses for the defense, or have any character witnesses in the courtroom. They "convict" the respondent on the spot of whatever they have been accused of by their own judgement alone. Then the sheriff will use that unsubstantiated order like they would use a conviction, to build a case for other and maybe unrelated charges, all trumped up to smear and defame their own political opponents, and destroy the lives of the accused, and now "convicted" by only a Judge's sayso.

This happens daily in Montana and all over the nation. There is no protection for the accused in this scenario whatsoever. What happened to "Innocent until proven guilty beyond a doubt"? The JP courts are not a court of record, so it's easy for the JP judges to simply deny any wrongdoing. And trying to get that order reviewed by a state district court is very expensive and time consuming, so much so that the respondent won't be able to do it. The JP judges know that. They count on it. They abuse their power and use it as a weapon to destroy their political opposition.

This is exactly the kind of abuse of power that the Grand Jury is designed to protect We the People from.

For a great and timely history of the power and use of the Grand Jury read this background:
http://americangrandjury.org/history_power.html

As I have said many times before, I will exhaust every lawful means of getting government back under the control of We the People. There is much corruption in government, especially in the Judiciary.
http://www.paulstramer.net/2009/09/when-is-it-time-to-fight.html

We the People can and must use every lawful means to eliminate this corruption if our children are to live in a free county and country, rather than a marxist democracy mob rule of men, making the rules as they go. Democracies never have worked for freedom anywhere throughout history. A Democracy will always lead to an Oligarchy (rule of the few) and loss of freedom. In short a Democracy is MOB RULE, and that is what we seem to have in American today especially in the judiciary. Over 2/3 of the people don't want health care. That is an undisputed fact even by the major media. In fact they don't talk about it. Where is the mechanism to bring the people who are shoving it down the American peoples throats to justice? Where is the remedy in justice for the little guy? It's in the Grand Jury and the petit (trial) jury.

"In addition to its traditional role of screening criminal cases for prosecution, common law grand juries had the power to exclude prosecutors from their presence at any time and to investigate public officials without governmental influence. These fundamental powers allowed grand juries to serve a vital function of oversight upon the government. The function of a grand jury to ferret out government corruption was the primary purpose of the grand jury system in ages past."   Roger Roots, J.D.
If it's not a runaway, it's not a Real Grand Jury:
http://www.constitution.org/lrev/roots/runaway.htm
You have the right as a trial juror to judge of the law as well as the facts in any case you are on.
You already have that right. You don't have to lobby for it. You don't have to get any new laws passed.
You don't have to change the Constitution. You just have to understand and exercise your rights. You have to take command in the jury room, and educate your fellow jurors. You have to enforce the Constitution and nullify bad laws in the jury room. You have to uphold the God given "unalienable" natural laws expressed and protected by the Constitution in the jury room. It's your power, unless you give it away to the judge when he tells you that you don't have it. That is right. The judges abuse their power by saying you must take the law "the way I give it to you" in effect saying you are too stupid to understand it. This arrogance needs to be stopped and soon. In fact the most famous Judge to make this mistake was a signer of the Declaration of Independence, Samuel Chase. In the US v. Callender case attempted to rule that a jury could not decide the Constututionality of a law. It may have been partially by the following statement that he averted impeachment.
SAMUEL CHASE (Justice, U. S. Supreme Court and signer of the Declaration of Independence; in 1804): "The jury has the right to determine both the law and the facts."


See your jury rights here:
http://www.fija.org/docs/JG_state_language_on_jury_nullification.pdf

Read the Jury rights handbook here:
http://www.fija.org/docs/JG_Jurors_Handbook.pdf

Some people would like you to believe that the ordinary citizen is incapable of understanding these issues. Some would like you to believe you are too dumb to read these laws and make sense of them. They want your mind in a box of their own creation. You need to think outside their box, like the founders did.
You need to understand and exercise your rights guaranteed by the US Constitution. If you don't you will lose those God given and Constitutionally protected rights forever, for yourself and your posterity.

I choose to fight with the law first. We shall see later how unlawful and corrupt these "rule of men" people really are.  I say again. those who oppose this lawful idea of reviving the standing Grand Jury should be the first to be investigated. Without accusing them of anything, I would bet that many get a paycheck from some branch of government.

It seems that leftists don't want you to know these history lessons. It seems they don't want you to exercise your true power to stop corruption. So now it's up to you. You no longer can say "But what can we do about it?"

Paul Stramer
http://www.lincolncountywatch.org/

LEGAL NOTICE: The Authors specifically invoke the First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and of the press, without prejudice, on this website. The information posted on this website is published for informational purposes only under the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution for the United States of America. Images, text and logic are copyright protected. ALL rights are explicitly reserved without prejudice, and no part of this website may be reproduced unless by written consent. You hereby have written consent to post any individual post from this website containing this copyright to any other blog or email only if you post the whole and unaltered article including this copyright, and give proper credit to the author, and a link back to this blog at http://www.paulstramer.net/. This applies only to articles written by Paul Stramer. ©2005-2009 by Montana Business Communications (PDS) All rights remain in force. Removing this notice forfeits all rights to recourse. Copyright strictly enforced © The videos are third party and not covered by this legal notice.