Constitution and Court

Law and order has taken a huge turn in the last 3 years, or better said the Law of the Land. Now whether that turn is on our side or not, it's definitely looks like a corrupt clown show.

Prosecutors in the last decade have elevated the law modernly outside of neutrality. Making the defense for an innocence of a man or women more difficult to prove.

Courts of Law are seemed to be controlled by the statute a person is accused under. They are not accused under the Amendment that brings precedent under the courts view. Which if individuals were properly accused under the 6th Amendment or 5th Amendment it would change many outcomes when in session. It almost always fails when the United States Constitution is brought into procedure for demonstration on the behalf of the individual accused or not. As justice is always important sometimes Statutory laws can be twisted from its core root principles of their existence. Judges in the appeals, from gathering data on judges conduct, often these judges pick up cases that are what they say, the words in bold after your conviction on paper. So many people don't understand why the data of the conduct of Judges do not lean favorable to a right of action or exercise. That often means judges who once have been attorneys review cases based on how they are brought to them. Some believe history accounts for occasion determining the Constitutionality of a law that was applied to you. And some believe they are to redress the prior actions from the courts before their court. Based on law, and interpretation.

It's often said in many jurisdictions that laws can be good when they are applied to conduct that can be deemed unconfident or unnecessary. But who are they to determine what is, and isn't constitutional conduct. Everyone is different and everyone has a belief. On the other hand most laws are written neutral without opinion in their language construction for civil or criminal purposes. The language in criminal statutes are written to both determine the presumption of innocence and guilt. If a person did not act in the conduct of a Statutory law prohibition, there really is no argument around whether they should be prosecuted or punished. The opinion of the Court to alter the language of a law in opinion to violate the Constitution of the United States or State really has no solid sufficient grounds for bad faith actions. To me if they did those actions would be void following such alterations.

Many people panic when in the back of their mind they think, "I might have done something wrong for me to be here in court and I need a lawyer."

How can that individual rely on a lawyer when in fact that individual doesn't even know what they did wrong or even if they are innocent. One should ask the question. "Was I driving", "was I doing drugs" or "was I illegally possessing a firearm."

Or were you traveling, and practicing your religion through symbolic expression as well as being in the close proximity to an arm that doesn't qualify to be a weapon in constitutional legal definition.

Often many people find that their practice of conveyance in living is at burden when the government and the Justice system are against conduct that violates their laws. However sometimes that conduct doesn't truly violate those laws and their is a whole other side to the theory of your conduct being aligned with constitutional activity that brings you to innocence before a court of law that does not honor the foundation of exclusive equity jurisprudence.

The actions of officials on the street and in the court are intended to be restricted to their own governing body of code.

An officer faces way more danger in civil code suit then old school constitutional law thumping. The reason is, federal law is developed to demonstrate constitutional misconduct.

If an officer moves to claim for the hold you accountable scheme for what he believes violates the Constitution, remember, that you can believe his actions to hold to under duress for his behavior is just as serious. And this comes all the way down to the law. Wrongful applications or misapplication of law. An officer who shoots an innocent person engages to apply the law for his reasoning without due process of law. That is totally unlawful. The authority over law is the Constitution, and the Court are the ones to interpret the Constitution first and then the law. This would be called "the clear mind of application."

It's not that all laws are unconstitutional it's just how they are applied and when they are supposed to be applied. In order for an officer to apply the law they must take you through proper due process. Giving you the reasonable opportunity to defend.

So, never panic when court sends you a letter asking for your appearance. Ask to file a brief, ask to demonstrate to an impartial panel or judge that you can't be Lawfully proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt unless the law is twisted against you. Defensive legal mechanism through the understanding of the underground legal field is grounded to the Constitution of the United States. Such as the discoveries of the legal art of terms. If a monster such as the State jumps on your tail, by God Almighty find your legal art of terms to have values in order to defend you from that monster.

In all honesty participants of both sides are subject to the same legal procedures. It's just whether you understand how to operate the same legal mechanism of the constitution with statutory law as they operate. That private law and public law both are at conflict when a law is applied to a specific conduct that was not brought through due process before the cuffs became your personal bracelet.

Often States today refuse to criticize the misconduct of officers who do such horrific things to people that didn't even get a chance to be heard before their incarceration. Then now after incarceration wanting hundreds or thousands of dollars in order to continue the pursuit of happiness. It's called diplomatic commercial invasion: Private sectors invading the sovereign foundation of a nations strength, it's citizenry.

The system design of these invaders are held to high standards under code and old private living constitutional law obviously. The law of the sea only goes so far. And we know this. It's time for Americans to take a stand and pursue the truth of the constitutional legal battle on our land today. It would do God his justice for his Land.

This page is for judicial insider research and view by Jeremiah David Powers Jr.

Email me for feedback

jeremiahpowers21@gmail.com

In respect to reallibertymedia.com