Home

CourtCorruption.com
YakimaCorruption.com

Doug Buchanan
Email: David at Buchanan.ws

26 August 2003

If there is any error or contradiction in the following, please assist the author's desire to correct it, but you might wisely first ask several questions of your conclusion, because the author did.

 

The jury

 

A society defines its intelligence by the reasoning ability of its juries, by definition of what juries are. There is not a more accurate illumination of a society's intelligence and the quality of its education system. That concepts prevails above all other considerations. Below is the reason why commonly intelligent people, that is, people with common sense, would not live in, invest in or raise their children in Yakima Washington, as any common sense-person verifying the below would conclude.

The people of Yakima Washington can promptly correct that glaring deficiency in the proof of their social intelligence level, at any time of their choice.

 

If you could achieve only one accomplishment in your life, for the protection of individual human freedom for yourself and your offspring, you would prove your great wisdom by protecting the jury system as it was designed.

All of the wars and elections won, or utility of guns in the hands of citizens to protect against government tyranny, are the illusions of fools if they have no jury system functioning as it was originally designed, to protect their freedom from their inherently corrupt government. Your police and military personnel are third-world mentality fools if they protect a society not sufficiently intelligent to sustain a jury system as it was originally designed.

 

The 12 person jury was described by its creators, and all intelligent people, as the single most brilliant system devised by humans, to protect society from the INHERENT corruption and tyranny of government personnel. The duty of the Jury was so important to the American system of government that it was secured in four separate articles or amendments of the US Constitution.

But a jury system and a free society, require literate people who are sufficiently intelligent to simply ask questions of the decrees of corrupted government dolts, rather than mindlessly do as government dolts demand. There is no more minimal and easy standard of intelligence for a free society. The adults of Yakima Washington cannot meet even that embarrassingly minimal standard, as their actions prove. They are incapable of simply asking questions and demanding answers from the government dolts they pay, no matter how glaring the corruption and abuses of their government.

The subversion of an otherwise established jury system, to render it meaningless and a rubber stamp for government dolts with court judge jobs, describes the single most ignorant, lazy, intellectually void, unquestioning and flat stupid society of humans. Even the least intelligent person would not surrender the sovereign authority of the 12 person jury, for anything less than their life. By design, the jury system is worth more for freedom than all the freedom of the press, speech, religion, petition, democratic votes, guns, or any other device.

A society of ignorant, unquestioning, cowardice people, no matter how self-lavished with impressive-sounding paper credentials alluding to a therefore hollow educational system, festooned with war medals and armed with guns, cannot possibly protect freedom for their offspring.

Individual freedom is the hallmark of intelligent people.

Unquestioned subservience to idiot government dolts who must rely on the raw power of their police and military guns, rather than on their ability to think, is the hallmark of stupid people in a doomed social system of governance.

It would be the goal of the offspring of unquestioning people, impaired by being trained by ignorant adults, to regain their freedom, if they retained enough intelligence, or struggled to achieve any intelligence, to be able to do so.

That is your primary goal as a commonly intelligent young person reading this website, unless you wish to end up as laughably ignorant as American adults, and wish to leave your own offspring with a yet greater burden of ignorance and servitude to malicious government dolts. You have no other choice, because your parents and their ilk of adults defrauded you of your protection under the rule of written law in this nation, especially in Yakima Washington. Your parents and their ilk of adults were too lazy, too ignorant and too cowardice to provide you the actual substance of what they describe in their lies about your freedom in this nation. If you leave your offspring with as little freedom and as few rights as the people in Yakima, your offspring may flatter you in your presence, but if they become even minimally intelligent, they will despise you for defrauding them of the protection of written law.

The adults of Yakima valley Washington have ascribed to public court record perhaps the most illuminating and laughable example of human ignorance in the arena of protecting freedom for their themselves, their neighbors and their offspring. American military personnel who fought in wars wasted their sacrifices if the adults of Yakima Washington represent the intelligence level of America.

The 12 person jury is comprised of the peers in society with absolute sovereign authority for its decisions, and is thus the formal, undeniable representation of the independent, intellectual capability of a society's adults. If the jury is anything else, it has been subverted and rigged by the government which selects it, and thus defines the gullibility of the society for allowing its government lawyers and judges to rig the jury.

All lawyers hold a government license under the inferior laws. They represent the government, to whose license they are beholding. Their lucrative license, by law, makes them officers of the government's court, and thus beholding to the personal decrees of the presiding officer of the court, a government judge. It is a monarchy system of rich dukes, princes and kings, whose positions are acquired by law school process, separated from any demand that they are beholding to the written law above the decrees of the court's presiding officer, the judge / king. They are not beholding to the written law. They are beholding to a personality, the judge. That inferior law system, which they wrote for themselves, exempts them from any duty to obey the written law, and places their clients under a duty to a personality, the judge who is also a lawyer. They wrote for themselves the law that granted them raw personal power above the law, which is dependent upon the free will of the citizens who are deceived into willfully acquiescing to representation by a lawyer, or so called "pro se" representation holding a hidden meaning, and thus placing themselves under an officer of the court rather than being protected by the written law. They represent the government. No lawyer represents his client or law above the whims of the judge, by law, least the lawyer can immediately lose his lucrative lawyer's license. If you are represented by a lawyer, you have therefore already willfully acquiesced to the surrender of your rights that were protected by written law, and placed yourself, by your own free choice, under the rule of an inherently fallible personality who holds a politically appointed judge job. He who is represented by an officer of the court, or acquiesces to being defined as an officer of the court, by inferior law, and is thus beholding to a personality who holds the power of a king, is obviously a fool. The founding fathers of this nation would have imprisoned if not shot the American public school teachers who do not teach American young people the contrivances that lawyers/judges have written into their pocket rules of the court, as purported law, to separate American citizens from their rights, by simple deception, otherwise protected in the prevailing written laws. American adults are so laughably ignorant, because they failed to simply ask questions of glaring contradictions, that if you end up like them, you will be laughed at by every common-sense person for the rest of human history.

The American military personnel who fought or died in wars, foolishly believing they were protecting American freedom, were only protecting the raw, lucrative, personal power of lawyers and judges, and were thus fools, much like myself when I fought in Vietnam, much to my amusement. If a parent, brother, sister, son or daughter is or was in the American military, they are or were a fool serving kings who have laughably fooled Americans out of their protection of the written law, including the supreme law of the land, the US Constitution. You may show them these words, and inform them that you are going to ask enough questions to not end up as an ignorant fool like them.

Besides proving the laughable nature of its society, a 12 person jury which is so gullible that it can be subverted and rigged by the contrivances of inherently idiot lawyers and judges, to serve the desires of lawyers and judges, proves the astonishing stupidity of lawyers and judges who thus destroy the system that protects their own offspring from other local jurisdictions of corrupted lawyers and judges. If you are the offspring of a lawyer or judge, this case proves why commonly intelligent people laugh at you for your pitiable condition. It is no doubt beyond your intellectual ability to question your way out of your condition. Your mind was most effectively trained by your parents or guardians.

Your goal, if you wish, from reading these words, is to derive the knowledge and incentive to start asking the questions to extract your mind from the horribly debilitating ignorance that your parents, school teachers, government sorts and other adults instilled into you, especially if you live in the Yakima valley. You must learn to ask the questions to identify and resolve every expressed or manifested contradiction, including any you can find in the words you are reading.

The proof that your parents, school teachers and government sorts are dependent upon raw animal power, represented by muscles and police guns, rather than deriving any benefit from their human thinking ability, is illuminated in their verifiably keeping you more ignorant than them. Classic among the proofs is their successfully lying to you about the jury system. Other proofs include the obvious results of keeping you ignorant of what law is and how it works, what money is and how it works, and how to ask effective questions, discussed elsewhere. But the jury system is the issue of this webpage.

Because no human can escape being corrupted by power, not you, not I, not anyone else, as proven by the history of humans, and proven by a flawless analysis (questioning) of the concept of power, and because government creates power, a wise person would devise a mechanism to counter the social effects of corrupted government power.

A crude mechanism in that regard is the process to secure the right of the common people to freely keep and carry the unregistered weapons, such as guns, sufficient to efficiently kill the government's inherently corrupted, unquestioning, mental midget police and military minions when the government inherently becomes so corrupted that it is undeniably tyrannical. It requires only one routinely insane military general with sufficient boldness to claim control of the US government, and his military minions will do as they are ordered, as they have trained their minds to do without question, as they routinely prove, to do just that if the citizens have no guns to kill the military minions who thus act against the constitution which defines the limits on the power of the government. A free society, if its police and military is armed, is an armed society, unless the society is so gullible that even when armed it can be rhetorically fooled out of its rights, as has that of Yakima Washington.

A military take-over of the US government, as only a minor and unlikely instructive example, will not happen by an obvious power play, but by a simple process of deception just like the lawyers used to seize ownership of the written law to separate citizens from its protection. Such a gambit might end up with the military's unquestioned ability to seize whichever citizens might ask questions about the government's contradictions, and hold those citizens in military confinement without any charges of a crime. The military sorts might deny the seized citizens access to lawyers, because the military sorts despise lawyers as much as everyone else in the world despises lawyers for obvious reasons illuminated herein. The seized citizens might be denied the right to a jury trial, and all their rights, perhaps taken to a military base in another country, and held indefinitely, probably under a ruse such as protecting society from Jews, Arabs, cult members, terrorists, or whichever rhetorical demon the government and news journalists currently fabricate. It will just be another small shift in power, adding to the others, leaving Americans with fewer rights, as if they currently held any, much to the amusement of observers.

The gullible citizen gun owners who claim to be protecting American freedom would simply be fooled out of their rights, while waving the flag and patriotically supporting the military. The citizens will not use their guns, because no single event will entice the use of guns. The gun owners, and other adults, are too ignorant to recognize that the real protection of American freedom is in protecting the absolute authority of the jury of citizen peers, the peaceful and thus reasoned process. If, because American adults are too ignorant to figure out how to do that (by EFFECTIVELY questioning judges on public record), the military can easily extend the lawyer gambit of separating the people from the protection of written law, to military control. The idiot lawyers/judges who fool ignorant citizens, to create a system of raw personal power above the authority of written law that otherwise limits the power of judges, invite the the more heavily armed and thus more powerful military, then no longer limited by written law, to seize the power from the judges. Thus the lawyers and judges are defrauding their idiot offspring and everyone else too dumb to question the contradictions of lawyers and judges, much to the amusement of observers. The process is ancient and has collapsed every system of governance that placed power in the minds of inherently corruptible personalities.

If an idiot, power-craving US President, such as are the only thing gullible American adults elect these days, ordered his mindless, heavily armed Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and US Army Delta Force thugs, using executive authority that no judge will ever question, to attack and slaughter some Christians in their church in your town, such as the Dividian Christian church at Waco Texas, so the President could fabricate a news event among unquestioning American news journalists, to please one of the President's political special interest groups, as did Bill Clinton, would you want him to be easily successful, or would you want the Christians of that church to shoot and kill enough BATF, FBI and US Army thugs, to cause that President, the next ones, and their mindless government thugs who otherwise never question orders, to think a bit more before they attacked your Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist or other church, tomorrow? Well? Write your answer. It defines your mind's understanding of the benefit of the freedom to make your own mind's decisions, or it being so useless to you that its decisions are those of whatever mental midget Neanderthal commanding equally mental midget police or military decree for you. You will preclude much frustration in life if you make that decision at this time, and act upon your mind's decision. First, keep your guns, if you wish, because the FBI and US Army will attack more churches in the US, but there is no effective substitute among humans for the ability of your mind to think, that is, ask effective questions, by design of humans being predicated on their mind, not swords, guns or bombs.

The founding fathers of the united States of America were described as wise (barely enough), because they did not rely only on the Neanderthal concept of armed force to defend the freedom of each next generation. They were also using their minds for thinking, a skill not known to modern American adults. As the primary process to defend citizen freedom and rights, the writers of the US Constitution formally instituted the 12 person jury of impartial peers, fellow citizens, to act on their CONSCIENCE, not the instructions of an inherently corrupt government court judge, as the supreme authority in this nation, the most brilliant system of impartial human reasoning ever placed above institutional power.

No authority in this nation is higher than the 12 person jury, much to the UNMITIGATED RAGE of inherently corrupted court judges, prosecutors, lawyers, congressmen, presidents, governors, police, military sorts, bureaucrats and other power-craving government dolts. No government accusation against a citizen can prevail against a jury's conclusion, and the jury may decide a case for any reason of its conscience, whatsoever, and need not tell anyone that reason.

The following is what wise persons have learned, and you can learn if you ask enough questions. By design of the human mind, the conclusions of what is commonly called the conscience of the mind which is unaltered by titles of power, will most often conform to logic or truth, that to which you would agree if all your mind's questions are answered. In contrast, by design of the human mind, a mind whose perceptions are altered (corrupted) by titles of power, will always defy logic and and truth, to defend that power from questioning, to conform to the demand of exercising damaging power over other humans. That can be flawlessly verified. If you create a system of power, such as government, which therefore alters the original design of the human mind, you are wise to create a counter balance, such as a system effecting the use of conscience above power. The 12 person jury, wholly independent and above the power of government, is that system.

If you learn what the concept of power is and how it works within the human mind, you will learn why the victims of adopting power, HATE and cannot tolerate the existence of human conscience. Power cannot exist in face of knowledge, logic, conscience, truth, reasoning and such concepts inherent to the original design of the human mind. With knowledge, you will laugh robustly at the antics of court judges and other government ilk doing everything their pitiable minds can devise to attack truth, to advance raw power.

As a young person, you may laugh robustly that these words on this webpage, enrage the vulnerable, simpleton minds of American court judges who have routinely attempted all manner of ruses to keep even their own therefore stupid offspring ignorant of the authority of jurors above the raw power of judges. The petty politically appointed titles of court judges, identical to those of the dukes, princes and kings of old, have easily fooled those unquestioning minds into sincerely believing that they have somehow thus acquired a design of human mind superior to that of yours, mind and all other humans. They are obviously a pitiable lot with a horribly self-damaged thinking process, no doubt instilled in their offspring.

In their seething anger, court judges have harassed and even jailed jurors for daring to bring forward verdicts of innocence after the pocket government judges have functionally ordered the jury to find verdicts of guilt, often through contrived "instructions", but those judges ultimately failed each time the jurors held the intelligence and courage to stand on their verdict, as human minds inherently equal in design to the minds of court judges, but not corrupted by the title of the court judge.

The jurors are assembled for one or a few decisions on a particular case, are poorly paid, receive no formal titles, offices, possible promotions or institutional benefits. They are thus instituted without power, hold no power to defend by process, and they are dismissed upon conclusion of their temporary duty. They are separated from institutional power, and thus produce human reasoning as much uncorrupted by power as society has been able to devise. They are the most perfect judge a society can produce for a decision in relation to a government accusation or demand against a citizen of the society.

Because power corrupts, would you wisely not create a system which separates power from decisions that affect society? Does a court judge hold power? The brilliance of a 12 person jury should be obvious, except to the power-damaged minds of court judges and their ilk of other ignorant adults. So horribly damaged by power are the minds of court judges, that they would even subject their own offspring to the corrupted power of other self-serving judges, rather than protect them with the conscience of a jury holding no power to defend, but holding authority above judges.

The jurors hold the absolute duty to, and can lawfully, ignore or negate bad laws, misapplied laws, unlawful orders, dishonest instructions, limiting instructions, wrongfully demanded oaths and other devices of power created by, or misapplied by, corrupted judges, lawyers, legislators, police, bureaucrats and any agent of government. The jury is the people's ultimate check and balance against government. The jury holds the obviously logical duty to find a person innocent if the government used process that violated the rights of the accused, denied the rights of the jury to be informed of evidence, or any other government abuse of its power, as you obviously agree if you were wrongfully accused by government sorts, or had your rights denied by them. If you do not protect the other guy's rights, yours are lost. The jury's conscience holds authority above the government and its judge, in every possible way, and cannot be lawfully limited in any possible way. Judges and other government dolts function on their corrupted power. Jurors function on human conscience. Read that again, to recognize what ultimately collapses all corrupted government power. It is the conscience of the citizenry that overthrows tyrannical governments, either by armed revolution, or more wisely by peaceful process such as the jury system upon each little attempt of government to impose power above reasoning.

Because jurors need never inform the government of the reasoning for their decision, or can rightfully tell a prying government official or judge to piss-off, or simply lie to the nosy government dolt, and because government dolts cannot read the minds of fellow humans, there is no verifiable process to hold a juror's decision of conscience to any inferior law requiring a juror to conclude what the government wants the juror to conclude. The jury system is brilliant, if the people of the society are not so intellectually void that they will do whatever an inherently power-craving court judge instructs them to do. A useful jury system requires adults who are sufficiently intelligent to be able to effectively question the actions of corrupted judges, lawyers and other government dolts. Because your parents, school teachers and government sorts failed to teach you how to ask effective questions, as proven by the actions of adults, learn that skill now.

Therefore, if you observe and ask questions about the incessant processes that corrupted lawyers and judges have used to easily fool gullible adults into willfully surrendering their authority as jurors, and render jurors as mindless rubber stamps for the instructions of the judge, you will rightfully laugh at your parents, school teachers, government minions and other adults fooled by fools whose minds function on power. Yakima valley jurors obviously decide whatever the judge instructs them to decide, without asking any questions, as this case illuminates, much to your amusement.

Do not let your mind be rendered as useless to you as have adults who believe court judges rather than ruthlessly question them.

Because no prevailing law limits or can functionally limit the decisions of jurors, a process hidden within the human mind, when a court judge issues the jury instructions, implying an illusion of law, that preclude any decision or consideration whatsoever, a commonly intelligent person recognizes that the judge is corrupted, and is unlawfully attempting to tamper with, limit or design the conclusion of the jury. It is the duty of the jury to therefore completely disregard the instructions of such a corrupted judge, and recognize that the verdict he is attempting to devise is probably the wrong one.

The judge's instructions to the jury have become one of the most notorious devices of judicial corruption, fooling obviously laughable fools who are too ignorant to question the concept of a judge instructing the higher authority of the jury. Read that again. For the case discussed by this website, as in most such cases, the judge issued the jury the instructions written by the government, in this case the Yakima City Council members, not anyone impartial, verbatim. The Council members wrote their instructions and handed them to the judge to read to the jury. The property owner's suggestions to make the instructions impartial, were denied by Judge Hackett. That is how easily Yakima jurors are fooled. They were instructed by the government, through its pocket judge, to find a verdict against the property owner, and the jurors remained clueless, mindlessly doing as told, because they asked no questions. Do not end up as gullible as Yakima valley adults who have perpetuated that corrupted process for the Yakima City Council members and their pocket judges.

To benefit most from your rightful laughter at Yakima valley adults, AND DERIVE THE MAXIMUM RESULTING KNOWLEDGE, recognize that the author of these words was raised in the Yakima valley, and thus rendered so stupid that he even gullibly believed the obvious lies of the Washington DC government idiots, who have only become progressively worse, and therefore ran off to Vietnam as an aforementioned US Army thug to attack the Vietnamese for daring to not believe and not kowtow to the self-serving lies of the Washington DC government idiots. Do not end up asking no effective questions for as many years as this author so failed, before you figure out that the adults are lying to you approximately 100 percent of the time, sometimes more. Learn to ask effective questions by asking a lot of questions, writing them, and writing the answers, every day while you are still young enough to retain a curious mind. You must laboriously train your mind to be able to identify deceit from truth, by asking effective questions, or you will end up as laughably gullible as this case proves of adults. Because I am an adult, there is nothing of what you are reading that you should believe until you ask the questions that verify the truth against every question you can devise. Your only indicator for these words is that I claim no titles, and thus hold no power to defend above flawless proof, and tell you that you must ruthlessly question everything you are told.

First you train your mind. And then it controls you. Train it to ask the questions that enrage lawyers, judges, government sorts and other power-damaged minds holding titles within institutions they must defend to defend their ludicrous little tiles, or you will easily end up with a power-damaged mind useless to yourself and society, for any goal beyond doing what you are told by idiots, your entire life.

There is a reason inherent to humans, that the Vietnamese killed a lot of American military sorts in Vietnam, the Afghans killed a lot of Soviet military sorts in Afghanistan, the Chechnians are killing a lot of Russians in Chechnya, and the Iraqis will continue to kill American military sorts in Iraq, as in all such Wag The Dog Wars, including the next ones. What precisely worded questions did those gullible soldiers, who wasted their lives to make cowardice government leaders popular among gullible, unquestioning adults, not first ask their own government leaders? Ask those questions before you get sucked into paying taxes for a mindless military attacking people in other countries to support the popularity of mental midget presidents, lawyers and judges who have subverted your right to the protection of the written law that otherwise limits the power of presidents, lawyers and judges. Write those questions. Write the answers. What questions have the foolish, gullible Yakima valley adults, and their useless news journalists, not asked the judges lavishly paid by Yakima valley taxpayers?

What questions did the Yakima jurors foolishly not ask Judge Hackett before Hackett therefore easily made a fool of those unquestioning jurors and Yakima valley adults? Ask those questions. Write them. Write the answers. If you do not, you will end up as dumb as adults.

The jury in this case was, of course, were treated like mushrooms by the court officers, kept in the dark and fed feces, a gullible person's delight, just as your school teachers treat you for knowledge of the ACTUAL PROCESSES of your courts and your government. The jurors were kept out of the court room while the stage was set with all the phony props and illusions of facts and laws of the case. The corrupted judge orchestrated the pre-trial decrees that denied the jury access to any truth or prevailing law. He insured that they would hear only the government lies, half truths and inferior laws, and not the citizen's case, much to the amusement of the property owner.

The jurors were not allowed into their own court process to hear that Judge Hackett was not allowing the property owner to present his case to the jurors, or even mention the principles of law that protected the property owner from the government and Judge Hackett's court scam. The jurors were also not allowed to hear that the property owner was further threatened with penalties, against any attempt to inform the jurors that Hackett had denied the property owner those and other rights, such as the right of free speech. The property owner was denied the right to present his case, and denied the right to inform the jurors that the judge had denied his right to present his case.

The jurors, because they were dumb as mud, only because they asked no questions, were used by the Judge Hackett and the Yakima City Council members to rubber stamp the government and court scam. Yakima valley citizens who are selected as jurors obviously have nothing more useful to do with their time. They are unquestioning rubber stamps for government, as this case proves. Do not end up being that useless as an individual human. If a court judge wants a rubber stamp, let him get one at a rubber stamp shop rather than jerk your chain.

If there is no right to freedom of speech in a court room, all rights are a fool's illusion. This case proves that there is no such right in America, so far supported by the Washington State Supreme Court justices. Your parents and school teachers have given you a fool's illusion, defining you as such if you foolishly believe them rather than ruthlessly question them.

First, the Yakima valley mushrooms were profiled and selected for the jury duty list by a process that removes most noticeably thinking people (those who ask questions) from the jury duty list. Because that court-designed system is not yet fully refined, and allows a percentage of thinking people to reach the jury selection process in court, court judges have devised a questioning process to remove other people sufficiently intelligent to question the incessant lies of court judges and lawyers.

If you want to learn about juries as they are currently orchestrated by American government dolts and their pocket judges, just as did Hitler when he was devising his court system for the rise of Nazi Party power, you may enjoy that excellent and highly educational mind game. To be selected for a jury, as a thinking person, you must learn enough to present yourself as a typical dumb American adult who will mindlessly do as a judge and government licensed lawyer orders you to do, without question. As a prospective juror, to act dumb enough to get selected for a jury, you may rightfully and lawfully lie to corrupted judges and lawyers who ask profiling questions for which they hold no lawful authority to demand answers. Even one thinking person on a jury, a rare phenomenon, can have more fun and do more good for society than all the citizen rights groups, news journalists, guns in the hands of NRA members, and all other institutions combined. The jury is the supreme authority in this nation, much to the mental rage of judges. And only one thinking person is required to defeat millions of unthinking, unquestioning mental midgets in a reasoning game. Just a few certain devastating questions among jurors can create more effective thought than all the Harvard and Oxford law professors have ever created among the unquestioning fools who become lawyers and then became Harvard and Oxford law professors.

During the questioning of the mushroom jurors for this case, the Yakima City lawyer was diligently writing notes on each prospective juror, using the profiling system taught to lawyers in law schools, to select unquestioning people who would gullibly believe whatever they are told by a titled person. In contrast, counsel for the property owner asked no questions of the jurors, and wrote no notes, for reason.

The Yakima City lawyer, in what was a laughable scene out of a slapstick comedy movie, then intently squinted at each of the jurors, and at his notes. Counsel for the property owner respectfully held his laughter. The City lawyer then dismissed some of the jurors who looked like they might be a thinking person. In contrast, counsel for the property owner dismissed no one, and accepted whatever jurors the City of Yakima and its pocket Court wished to define as representing the intelligence level of Yakima valley adults. He who selects fools to represent his society, represents himself as a fool, as did the Yakima City Council members via their lawyer, much to the amusement of common sense observers. He who is selected by lawyers and court process, for a juror, is as you obviously recognize from such a process, unless he is playing the lawyer more than the lawyer is playing the juror.

The questioning process to select jurors, beyond identifying legal age, literacy, and any DIRECT employment or blood relationship to the participants in court, constitutes a corrupted subversion of the jury system of peers. The moment you depart from a random selection of basically impartial peers, to ask the type questions that profile and select likely decisions from psychological stereotypes, you prove the corruption of the jury system and the intellectual void of a society which allows such glaring corruption of their court system. After the first profile type question, there is no logic-based demarcation to preclude any thousands of other contrived questions to derive a jury for a therefore pre-identified conclusion from any staged illusion of evidence or rhetoric during court process, especially when an inherently corrupted court judge can decree which questions that which party may or may not ask. The allowed profile questioning of jurors is just another proof that American adults are dumb as mud, and precisely what Hitler or Saddam would have selected for their system.

No excuses for profile questioning prevail within fully questioned reasoning. The concept of random impartiality among actual peers prevails above any contrivance to attempt impartiality for the minds of the obviously biased parties in court, including the inherently self-serving, power-craving judge. The attempt to resolve any of billions of contrived contradictions, such as precluding Muslims on a jury for a trial of a Muslim, or Christians on a jury for a trial of a Christian, by detailed questioning of jurors, creates the greater contradiction of selecting jurors profiled for a pre-conclusion of the person asking the questions. A wisely protected, impartial justice system, a concept unknown to inherently self-serving, power-based lawyers, judges and law school professors, is infinitely more valuable to society than any government craving for revenge against a citizen the government dolts do not like and hauled before a court.

You cannot successfully resolve a contradiction with another contradiction. There is no escape from that truism of reasoning. Do not let your mind become so unable to reason through contradictions, as have lawyers and judges, that your mind cannot understand the foregoing, or your mind will fabricate frustrating and damaging problems for you the rest of your life, in your ignorant attempt to resolve contradictions with contradictions.

So the government-selected jury for the case described in this website was seated, magnificently representing Yakima valley adults, by their own system. The jury portion of the trial was started.

What was the property owner to do? During the portion of the trial before the mushroom jurors were brought in, he was ordered to not even mention his case, or the laws that protected him from the government's unlawful court process, under threat of physical torture and unrevealed sanctions. He was not allowed to even mention that the judge disallowed him from introducing his case, or that he was under threat of torture and unrevealed sanctions if he did so.

The property owner was most amused, as would be you if you were a commonly intelligent person observing how thoroughly American adults make fools of themselves by their willfully denying their mind access to knowledge, under what obviously idiot lawyers and judges call, due process of law.

The Yakima City Council members, through their pitiable but amusing Yakima City lawyer and pocket judge, therefore presented their case of the usual lies, half truths, otherwise easily exposed contradictions, and inferior laws contradicted by superior laws, to the jury, all very officiously, with expert testimony of their City-paid property appraiser.

But Judge Hackett screwed-up just enough, as is inherent to power-damaged minds. It is not humanly possible for one human mind to successfully make the decisions for another inherently independent human mind with an inherently different data base, and force those decisions into effect within the second mind. A human mind holds no mechanism to force another human mind, as you can quickly recognize, while not even one American court judge can understand the meaning of those words even if you hand them an English dictionary, as judges prove by their actions.

Adults thoroughly train their mind to believe that they can FORCE their children to do as adults say, not as adults do, and believe that they hold no imperative to present their children with any REASONING for adult decrees. The adults use all manner of excuses, such as their children being to dumb to understand reasoning, thus illuminating the inability of the adult who was trained in the same manner. What the children were otherwise intending to do, usually only a minor inconvenience or annoyance of the adults, regardless of its magnitude becomes of zero importance compared to what that training process entrenches in the minds of young people. Therefore the minds of adults who were previously children trained in the same manner, become oblivious to the concept of the children then becoming adults whose minds have been thoroughly trained in precisely that process, the use of force above reasoning, a completely illogical concept for a device, the human mind, which holds no mechanism within it to force another human mind, and which was designed for the use of reasoning. The children whose minds are therefore NEVER trained in the initially tedious but vastly more efficient process of using reasoning to resolve contradictions, including in schools where the teachers are the same so trained adults, become adults, to perpetuate the process, and routinely end up as intellectually impaired as Judge Robert Hackett and all the other officers of American courts whose minds categorically believe that laws and judicial decrees are based on raw, mindless force of armed, unquestioning and thus unthinking police, and threats of prison, rather than on human reasoning.

It is an aside to note that the few written common laws, the only laws you are lawfully required to obey if you know how to access their protection, are statements of reasoning, not bare conclusions as are the inferior laws. The common laws are created by an interesting system described elsewhere. They are hated and feared by lawyers, judges and government dolts, more than death itself, because power cannot tolerate human reasoning which inherently limits power. Reasoning is the death of power, and power at play in the minds of its victims, will defend its concept above the lives of humans, least it could not exist.

Thus humans (you) are stagnated within our intellectual dark ages, much to your robust laughter the rest of your life, at all things human, if you merely invest in the small amount of time to ask the controlling questions to teach yourself the way out of such self-induced contradictions and frustrating problems that adults incessantly cause themselves. Why else would adults tell children to do as adults say, not as adults do, instead of do as adults do when the children become adults? Well?

But the word, reasoning, exists, for a reason inherent to the design of the human mind, so the adults who remain clueless of its actual meaning within what humans can do with reasoning, speak of it, and because they trained their mind as children to not do as adults do, but only as adults say, they do not do with reasoning what they say. They say they use reasoning, but instead use process of force, just as their parents did, and they trained their minds to literally be unable to recognize the contradiction.

Reasoning in court, and everywhere else, is the process of presenting data not limited by force, and easily synthesizing it to arrive at conclusions that do not contradict the data or any related, prevailing laws. Force is, for example, the process of threatening torture and other unrevealed sanctions, backed by armed thugs called court security, to deny the right to present the data and laws that could be synthesized to arrive at a logical, reasoned conclusion that could be different from what the government and its pocket judge have already decided under their force-based process obviously void of reasoning. Washington State Court of Appeals Division III Chief Judge Stephen M. Brown and his colleagues have demonstrated that their intellectually void minds cannot understand the foregoing concept, even if they are presented with the court record showing precisely what was described above. Pity the victims of law schools. Learn how to understand such concepts before you become an adult and thus, because adults are clueless of how to ask effective questions, lose the ability to understand such concepts defining the utility of your mind.

The minds of Washington State Superior Court judge Robert Hackett, all of his colleague superior court judges, all the judges of the Washington State Court of Appeals, and so far, all the judges of the Washington State Supreme Court, and all of their officers of the court, with all of their titles and credentials, who claim to be administering the written law, genuinely and sincerely believe that the highest law of the land, as written in verifiable words, identifying the reasoning ability of the American judicial institution, says as was done, that citizens may be lawfully threatened with torture and unrevealed sanctions to deny their right to introduce the citizen case and the laws which protect citizens from government thugs in the therefore Cuban-styled American courts. Their power-damaged minds literally cannot comprehend the contradiction between what is said and what is done, if government thugs do it, as what they do proves, precisely as they, their parents and school teachers trained them, even if they read these words and you hand them a dictionary. First you train your mind. And then it controls you. And it will make a public fool of you if you trained it to not question your glaring contradictions.

That is of course why those court sorts criminally evade their known legal duty to reveal the written law itself in court, as evidence, when a government-attacked citizen requests that the presiding court officer meet that paid duty. They categorically fear to reveal the written prevailing law as evidence in court, because it reveals they are criminally violating the law with their verbal decrees imposed under color of law and raw power of office. What they say in verbal words, as representing the law, and what was done when wiser people wrote prevailing laws, are different, inherent to the power-damaged mind, and they demand that fellow adults do as they say, not as they do, having become so intellectually void that they cannot even identify the difference between saying that to children and saying that to adults. That is what will happen to your mind if you believe your parents, school teachers and people who became so intellectually impaired that they became lawyers and judges. You must instead ruthlessly question their minds into such anguish that you approach even extracting them from their self-induced plight of abject human stupidity, for your goal of questioning your own mind out of what they taught your mind.

They are the unquestioning product of their parents, school teachers and colleague government dolts, and so train their children, the next pitiable victims of their parents, school teachers and government dolts. Do not let that happen to your priceless mind. Ask the questions that enrage the minds trained to use force above reasoning. Those questions will be based on reasoning and thus hold a meaning that power-damaged minds have heard of, but cannot identify within their mind.

Hackett denied the right of the property owner to reveal any of his case, except, because of a particular question of the property owner, he was allowed to mention that a controversy may involve the property as was otherwise easily illuminated, and, he was allowed to speak.

Ooops. Counsel for the property owner was allowed to speak, criminally denied his freedom of speech, but not totally silenced.

The reason government censorship always fails, and ultimately collapses the government or institution of such fools, in this case the American Court system as the least of its results, is that there are so many words and other processes that convey data among so many curious humans, that the only way to effect the intent of censorship is to kill every human except for the censor, which also creates the aforementioned collapse long before the Hackett mentalities can kill all the humans. If you kill someone in the name of what you say is good, as mental midget government leaders do with their unquestioning police and militaries, the humans who think recognize that it is obviously not good, and you must then kill them also. The product of killing people who think, therefore the people who ask questions, such as questions of authority, is a Neanderthal society which breeds people of the ilk of Hackett, Brown, Alexander, Yakima City Council members and such sorts who use devices of force to preclude the expression of reasoning that illuminates the flaws of force. There is no mechanism within the human mind for one mind to force another mind. If you are not using reasoning, you are just another Neanderthal throw-back, such as the Washington State court officers.

The property owner mentioned to the jury that a controversy surrounded the property, as he was allowed to mention. Then he approached the ire of the poor sad mentally vulnerable judge by stating that the property owner apparently could not present his case, which was fact and did not mention why, and therefore could not violate the judge's order because the reason could be anything, including a failing of the property owner.

Any common sense person, such as yourself, of whom there is apparently a paucity in Yakima valley, would immediately recognize that something was wrong with the information they were being fed by the government through the government court process. Why were they being denied information of a controversy which would obviously affect the value of the property? Who would make a jury decision, effecting an inherently damaging use of court force against someone's will, within a controversy of which they were denied the information, if not an astonishingly gullible or stupid person?

Further approaching the ire of the amusing mind of Judge Robert Hackett, when the Yakima City Council's appraiser testified as to the accuracy of his appraisal of the property, the property owner asked the appraiser if the value would be different under a different zoning for the same property. Thereupon, the City's own expert testified that the value would be different.

Even people as dumb as mud, but perhaps people not dumber than mud, could derive the following. The jury was presented with only the government's case, while counsel for the property owner was present and physically capable of speaking. A controversy involving the value of the property existed, but was not identified or explained. There were two values of the property, one defined by the government, and another one admitted by the government's expert appraiser but not otherwise identified or discussed. The property owner was obviously questioning the government's valuation, least there would be no court case costly to the property owner, tax payers, juror's time, and more.

Something was profoundly wrong. Would that not be obvious from the data? Would your mind not obviously have questions if you had not sunk to the embarrassing intellectual nadir of an American adult?

Even if you were so gullible that you did not recognize that your current government and its courts have become corrupt to their core, would you, identifying your current level of fundamental human intelligence in public, with your name on reviewable public record as a juror in the case, make a damaging decision against the property owner, your fellow citizen, with only the aforementioned information, without asking questions to resolve the glaring contradictions? Well, what is your answer? What would you say to the public? What would you do as a juror?

Ten out of twelve, 83 percent of Yakima valley adults would make such a decision, identifying their intellectual void, representing the peers of Yakima valley citizens.

Dumber than mud, or if they prefer, highly knowledgeable and categorically malicious toward fellow Yakima residents, sharing the intent of Judge Robert Hackett and is Washington State Court ilk who use Cuban Court styled threats of torture to silence the expression of law and reasoning. They would not know how to ask a question of a glaring contradiction if you sent them to school to learn the English language, and showed them these words. And there was not a noticeable Mexican, Indian, Catholic, Jew, Arab, mountain climber, cigar smoker or any other minority among them to blame. They were middle class supposedly educated classic American Yakima valley adults from the jury duty list of common residents, your friends and neighbors if you live there. Adults.

Ten out of the twelve jurors returned a decision in favor of the City Council members and their pocket judge, against the property owner. For such cases, as prior devised by the government from case statistics, ten out of twelve is what the government needs to seize private property by force, for whatever the government decrees is the value.

If I had not made dumber decisions than that, too many of them, such as attacking the Vietnamese for not kowtowing to the Washington DC idiots, I would marvel at how the other guy could be so stupid, but in fact it is the result of any human mind, theirs, yours, mine, the next guy's, and those over there in the other countries too, which does not ask effective questions before making decisions affecting other people. Do not wait as long as I did before I started asking the questions that school teachers and university professors will never teach you how to ask.

Lean how to ask those questions, and wisely do not invest in Yakima or Washington until the residents dump those malicious Council members, their lawyer and the judges in the Washington State Court system.

Only two out of twelve, 17 percent of Yakima valley adults are intelligent enough figure out that something is wrong with a court case in which only the government's information is presented, while a controversy and second value exists, of which the jurors are denied the information.

Would you move to, not promptly move away from, or invest in a region in which only 17 percent of the people were sufficiently intelligent to figure out that something was wrong with such a court case, and would maliciously seize your property at whim of local, greedy government dolts who openly stated to the public that they change the rules to punish those who obey the rules? Well? What is your answer? Do you utilize your own mind's answers to questions?

If you are not robustly laughing at the people of Yakima valley, especially while their equally dullard Chamber of Commerce sorts were spending money and supporting more taxation trying to attract investments to Yakima, you would make a superb Yakima valley resident, a City Council member and a Washington State Court judge. At least wisely do not improve your property if you live in Yakima.

You may be statistically safe in Yakima, because the local government and their lawless Washington State Court judges, with their unquestioning rubber-stamp jurors, have only enough time to attack the other guy, your neighbor, hopefully. That is not the issue. At issue is your mind's ability to identify and ask the questions to resolve contradictions. But if you do not utilize your own mind's answers to questions, you will quickly sink back down to saying that you do what you do not do, and thus prove your intellectual void, probably passing your ignorance on to your offspring. Would a wise person invest in Yakima?

A jury system is a waste of your tax dollars, and a waste of the time of the jurors if the prospective jurors are so dumb that they do not know how to ask questions of the most glaring contradictions humans can fabricate. If you want to conveniently learn how the otherwise educated and seemingly normal German society in the 1940's remained silent while their government slaughtered 13 million of their own fellow citizens (6 million Jews and 7 million non-Jews), or any other social contradiction, you need only ask the questions to ascertain precisely how (the process) Yakima valley residents were so easily duped into doing whatever idiots with government titles ordered them to do, without asking any questions.

Look at your friends and neighbors in Yakima, if you live there, including your parents. After all their words are said, despite their denials at seeing these words, their ongoing actions prove that 83 percent of them will continue to support their power-craving government and court dolts, without asking questions, just as did the aforementioned German folks, for the goal of seizing your property, changing the rules to punish those who obeyed the rules, denying your right to present your case in court to defend you from unlawful government actions, threatening you with physical torture if you mention the laws that protect you from court judges, and much more, and remain absolutely clueless that they have done anything wrong. Flee Yakima.

Your goal is to learn how to not let that happen to your mind, or you will be among the 83 percent, like their court lords and school teachers, clueless that anything is wrong. If the latter, you just as well replace your otherwise valuable mind with a TV channel selector or a can of pringles.

What is the actual resolution of any problem or contradiction? Is it what all the related data, openly revealed without omission, when synthesized or combined under full public scrutiny on record, reveals as a conclusion that does not create any contradiction, or is it what inherently corrupted Washington State Supreme Court Chief Justice Gerry L. Alexander decrees with raw power of office, because he easily scammed a politically appointed judge title, then first decreed that the related information may not be presented in court, and therefore decreed that the information does not exist, and therefore the conclusion is whatever he says? Well? Gerry sincerely and genuinely believes the answer is whatever he says it is, regardless of the data openly seen by the world, and his mind literally cannot comprehend the contradiction he thus creates, as is the case with his pitiable colleagues on the court bench, so far proven on record. Does a judge hold power? Does power corrupt? Why was prevailing written law designed to replace the power of the judge with the reasoning of the words in the written law? Would a wise judge or any other wise person subject his offspring to the corrupted power of another judge, or protect his offspring with the words of reasoning in the written law that precludes the power of the judge?

How is the rule of a therefore idiot dictator or court judge differentiated from the rule of written law itself, the latter being words on publicly accountable, prior written record, not current words from a mouth? What is your answer? Is it not within the question? Judge Alexander, his colleagues and 83 percent of Yakima valley adults cannot identify that answer, even if you showed them these words, as their actions prove.

Can any two written laws contradict each other, without prior written law identifying which prevails above the other, if the rule of written law prevails above the verbal decrees of court judges or other such petty dictators who could pick and chose which contradicting laws they wish to impose on their friends or enemies? What is your answer?

If you believe that Judge Hackett is not as dumb as 83 percent of Yakima valley adults, and they as dumb as he, an inherent result of they being from the same population pool whose minds were trained by the same process of raw force above human reasoning, ask any of those 83 percent if they would subsequently force the property owner to pay for the lawyer of the City because the property owner's court case was decreed by Hackett to be frivolous because no case was presented in court because Hackett denied the property owner his right to introduce his case.

Their resulting answer would be as meaningless and laughable as all the other words of adults, as proven by that resulting action, while Yakima valley adults respond only with more support for such human idiocy, just as illuminated by every other failed society whose system of social governance collapsed because they were too ignorant to simply ask questions of their glaring contradictions. Do not end up that ignorant.

By design, the mechanisms of corruption, lies, power and all CONTRADICTIONS SUPPORTED WITH FURTHER CONTRADICTIONS, cannot possibly retain a logic-based demarcation to preclude their insatiable nature. Write that sentence. The process to deny the property owner his right to present his case in court, with the jury then rubber-stamping the government's case, rather than the jury stopping the trial with any questions because the jurors were obviously defrauded of the evidence they needed to make a lawful decision, as was their duty, was the process the government needed to then use the same corrupted court judge to order the property owner to pay for the City's lawyer, thus effectively stealing the property and also the money of the property owner, much to the childish smirking of Hackett and Gilbert, for the moment, and much to the amusement of the property owner.

The Yakima City Council members and their pocket judge gained the illusion of propriety in the trial process, from the gullible jurors who advanced a corrupted process, without question, so the Council members and Hackett could write the rhetorical fabrication saying that because the property owner presented no case (not mentioning that he was unlawfully denied his right to present a case), there was no case, and the property owner's case was therefore frivolous, without merit, and therefore the property owner must pay for the City's lawyer. The property owner's money was therefore seized by court order.

Gullible people who do as they are told by government dolts, without asking questions for public record, damage their neighbors and society far more than any initial evaluation of their actions and excuses. How many Germans who gullibly told the Gestapo that a neighbor might be a Jew or Gypsy, anticipated the result of 13 million summary executions of fellow German citizens who had harmed no one and who had obeyed the rules? How many of those obviously gullible or malicious ten Yakima valley jurors anticipated that their ludicrously illogical decision would result in the property owner being required to pay the City lawyer for the process of the lawyer seizing the property without an allowed court defense? If you believe a lawyer, judge or other government dolt, instead of questioning the idiots into abject submission, you are certain to be made a fool of, often on public record, as is the case with those ten jurors whose names are on indelible public record. Do not be made a fool. Learn to ask questions. Ask them.

Your goal is not to change society. You have not yet learned sufficient wisdom to understand the process to do so. Tomorrow the people of Yakima will continue to maliciously attack and damage their neighbors with the raw force of their mental midget local government and Washington State Court dolts, on schedule. As long as society perpetuates its learning process predicated on raw power above the human mind's reasoning process, society will perpetuate the resulting amusement. Intelligent people will merely move, and invest effort where such human ignorance does not reign so supreme with such impunity. Your goal is to wisely be among the intelligent people, if you wish, and thus progressively learn the inherent benefits of wisdom.

Train your mind to ask and answer the questions that Judge Hackett's and Judge Alexander's miserably educated, institutionally-confused, politically titled minds cannot even comprehend, yet alone answer for public record, as proven by their actions in this case so far, so that you are at least among the 17 percent of thinking Yakima adults, and easily advance from there.

Consider some useful questions. If your mind cannot cause you to write the answers, initially correct or in error, you might make a superlative Washington State Court judge or Yakima valley adult.

1 - Is it the lawful duty of jurors to function as a check and balance on the power of the inherently corruptible court judges, prosecutors and police?

2 - Can a juror be lawfully forced to make a decision that violates his or her conscience?

3- Can a judge read the mind of a juror, or lawfully punish a juror for making a juror decision not in accordance with an order of the judge?

4 - Is it possible for an inherently corruptible judge make a mistake or criminally intend to dictate a jury decision by crafting his instructions to the jury to preclude otherwise lawful considerations and decisions?

5 - Can the power vested in a judge corrupt him or her?

6 - Is a person be rightfully defined as gullible by being rhetorically fooled or coerced into making a decision the person would not otherwise make?

7 - If a person knows that there are more than three items of data related to a decision that can damage someone, would that person be gullible or wise to make the decision based on the three items of data, before asking the questions to identify the other data?

8 - If a person is forced, intimidated or processed into stating an oath to obey the law as verbally stated by an inherently fallible personality, such as a judge, rather than obey the PREVAILING law itself, as fully revealed in writing and certified as prevailing, to achieve the RIGHT to be a juror, is that oath legally or logically binding on one's decisions as a juror?

9 - If a judge can craft instructions to the jurors, that they are told they must obey, is it possible for the judge craft a pre-determined verdict that the jurors could therefore be fooled into rubber-stamping?

10 - Can a juror lawfully refuse to agree with a majority decision of the other jurors, and lawfully violate all the instructions of the judge, and tell no one the reason for those decisions?

11 - Do jurors and all other people in this nation hold the right to lawfully refuse to answer any question asked by any government agent?

12 - It is a crime for Judge Robert Hackett to threaten physical torture, in court, as intimidation to silence a citizen's respectful expression of the principles of law that would defend the citizen from the damaging demands of government officials who have admitted on public record that they change the rules to punish those who obeyed the rules?

13 - Upon evidence of a crime, on record, being presented to a court officer, may the court officer lawfully ignore the evidence and not initiate any due process of law if the crime was committed by a colleague officer of the court?

14 - Which is subject to a higher standard for more strict law enforcement, a crime committed as such, or a crime committed by a government agent acting under color of law and thus under initial protection of implied law?

15 - Who is legally liable, as a known legal duty, the evasion of which is a crime, to initiate due process of criminal law upon record of a crime having been committed, being received by the Washington State Court of Appeals and the Washington State Supreme Court?

16 - If two laws contradict each other for the same action within the United States of America, what precisely identified category or jurisdiction of law consistently resolves the contradiction to identify which law prevails?

17 - Who is legally liable, the evasion of which is a crime, for revealing the full written law as evidence in a court, and certifying it as the prevailing law, upon request of a citizen brought before the court, for a government demand made under claim or color of authority within law?

18 - Is it possible for a judge to violate the law under claim of authority in law or power of office, such as to issue fraudulent instructions to a jury, that unlawfully limit, intimidate or deceive into alteration the otherwise lawful conclusions of conscience by the jury which is and must inherently be independent from the power of office held by the judge?

19 - Is it lawful, rational, logical, and just plain old down on the farm common sense for a jury to return to the courtroom with the expressed conclusion that the jurors have figured out that other evidence in the case exists, which was not presented to the jury, and that the jurors respectfully refuse to make fools of themselves on public record by fabricating a therefore flawed conclusion from inadequate data?

20 - If a court judge, by any contrivance, summarily denies a jury access to information clearly germane to a case, in the opinion of jurors before or after the fact, when the jurors are intellectually liable for making a reasoned decision, has the judge impeded due process of law and thus in criminal contempt of court?

21 - Do the above questions reveal to even grade school level people that the current American court system, by obvious actions of its court officers, is obviously corrupt to its core, with officers who are either dumber than mud or repugnantly malicious and lawless?

There are many more such useful questions to advance your knowledge.

If you are young, and your mind is still curious about the process of impartial human reasoning that advances human intelligence, rather than corrupted by the categorically damaging addiction to raw power held by the vast majority of adults, you can write the above questions, and write your answers, and sign your name to them for the public judgment of your current reasoning ability. It is not within the ability of the power-damaged minds of the Yakima City Council members, their pitiable City lawyers, court judges, school teachers, university professors and such adult ilk, to do so. Write your answers, and ask the next questions, and you will thus prove beyond effective questions that you are more intelligent than even the most titled and credentialed adults of your society.

The answers to the above questions, if you recognize them from your questions of them, are: 1 - Yes. 2 - No. 3 - No. 4 - Yes. 5 - Yes. 6 - Yes. 7 - The person would be gullible, not wise. 8 - No. 9 - Yes. 10 - Yes. 11 - Yes. 12 - Yes. 13 - No. 14 - A crime committed under color of law. 15 - The presiding officer of each said court (da judge), or their subordinate receiving the record if the subordinate did not inform the presiding officer, and acted on his own authority, but in the latter case, invoking the liability of the presiding officer to initiate due process of criminal law against his or her subordinate if he evaded his known legal duty. 16 - The common law, also described as the prevailing law uncontradicted by any superior law. 17 - The presiding officer of the court, unless he or she expressly places the duty of law on the government agent claiming such authority. 18 - Yes. 19 - Yes. 20 - Yes. 21 - Yes.

Am I in error with any of the above answers?

Who would come forward with notice of any error, and their reasoning, for public record? Please do so, for my goal is to advance my knowledge and that of anyone who might share an interest in advancing their intelligence for the benefit of themselves and society. I cannot do so with any error left in place, nor can any other human.

When you arrive at your conclusions, openly ask the next questions, least you end up as intellectually embarrassing as 83 percent of Yakima adults who cannot identify a contradiction in a court case in which only the government presents its case, much to the howling laughter of common sense humans.

There are several processes for those who wish to identify their common intelligence above the idiots in government and its courts, and above unquestioning jurors or any other unquestioning sorts. Each process is based on asking questions, and no such process can include retaining and attempting to defend a contradiction within your mind.

 

 

For your continued consideration...

 

Justice Gerry Alexander

Justice Mary Fairhurst

Justice Barbara Madsen

Justice Sandra O'Connor

The Contradiction

The Results

Judge Heather Van Nuys

Judge Robert Hackett

Links

Home

The other court sorts, to be added later.