Article VII
In Suits at common law, where the
value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury
shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise
re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of
the common law.
Really, you want us to draw a jury for a $20
civil municipal case. It is important to
know the value of a dollar. Back in
colonial days $20 was a lot of money. A $20
piece of currency in 1800 is worth $356 today. The gold alone in a $20 gold
piece is probably worth over $1,200 alone.
So as you can see the monetary values have an effect on what is
reasonable when considering drawing a jury.
However, you are still entitled to a jury trial in a civil case if the
case is federal, not local. A good
illustration is the OJ Simpson trial not the criminal but the civil, he got a
jury.
Amendment XIV
Section 1. All persons born or
naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are
citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State
shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of
citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person
within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Due process! If you
run a red light and hit and kill someone you are going to get more due process
than you can handle. Ms. Kowlonski ran a
red light and killed Mr. Clark and crippled his passenger for life at the
corner of Green Oaks and Cooper. Both were 21 yrs. of age. She was caught on a RLC and is doing 28 yrs. in
a federal prison.
7th Circuit Idris “It is enough to say that photographs are at
least as reliable as live testimony, that the due process clause allows
administrative decisions to be made on paper (or Photographic) records without
regard to the hearsay rule. And that the
procedures Chicago uses are functionally identical to those it uses to
adjudicate parking tickets, a system sustained in Van Harkin v. Chicago.” “substantive due
process depends on the existence of a fundamental liberty interest, and no one
has a fundamental right to run a red light or avoid being seen by a camera on a
public street.”
6th Circuit Mendenhall “The Akron ordinance as well as its
implementation, satisfies due process concerns.
First the ordinance provides for notice.
Second the ordinance provides for a hearing. Third a record is taken at the hearing and
Fourth the ordinance provides for the right of appeal to the Common Pleas
Court…on an adverse decision.”
Conclusions: We have
discussed the 4th 5th 6th 7th and
14th amendments and we have learned through these precedent setting
decisions that no Constitutional Rights are being violated with the use of RLC’s.
I have given you decisions from the
Supreme Court, the 5th 6th 7th Circuit Courts
and Texas State Law. So it is important
to realize that those people screaming about their Constitutional Rights being
violated are all wasting their collective breath. These are simply lies. To them a goat simply has 5 legs.
The reason that $20.00 piece of 1800's currency is so 'expensive' today is because our federal government has devalued the U.S. dollar... similar to the way it has devalued our Constitution. Politicians sure do get their panties in a bunch when the people demand some of their power or property be returned.
ReplyDelete$20.00 may not be much money to you, but it is still a significant amount of money to someone who doesn't have much of it. If government would restrain/retrain itself to simply its CONSTITUTIONALLY-MANDATED responsibilities and stop purposely creating new laws in order to entrap the people and confiscate their earnings, everyone would be happy. If you politicians would spend/waste LESS of OUR money, you wouldn't have to resort to turning over rocks and relentlessly pursuing new ways to steal our property.
There are plenty of judges out there who legislate from the bench and will eagerly trample the rights of the private citizen, without a second thought. Spend a day in family court or fight CPS for kidnapping your children if you want to see that sort of egregious behavior in person.
Many times appointed judges have completely ignored the will of the people at the ballot box and overruled election referendums, such as bans on homosexual 'marriage'. Thankfully in this case, at least one judge respects the rule of law and the rights of the people.
No I don't agree that the federal government is the reason for the decrease in the value of a $20 gold piece. I believe it to be the economics of goods and services. Good old supply and demand. All you have to do is look at the price of a gallon of gas to see that principal proven. The government puts a tax on it sure, but the rest of the price is predicated on what you are willing to pay for the product.
ReplyDeleteI also believe that there are people in our society that have an education in the law, some in Constitutional law, that should be held in a little higher esteem. These are judges, granted some liberal and some conservative, but none the less educated in the principals of the Constitution. I think it is their responsibility to determine if there is an infraction of the Constitution, not yours. The problem with everyone stating that their Constitutional Rights are being violated is that it is the reason the Constitution is being devalued. If you read this blog about the Constitution all of it is backed up with case law. It isn't my opinion. Can you say the same? If you were to stand in front of any of these judges with a RLC ticket I'm certain that the video captured by the RLC would take precedence over your opinion.
I just got done serving on jury duty the day before the debate on RLC's. 52 people were being looked at to set a jury. I can't imagine how much personal revenue was lost by those 52 people but I'm sure it was over $20. You would probably be one of the first to protest having to spend several days setting on a jury and losing income over a case involving a $20 fine. Your statement that some judges completely ignore the will of the people and overrule election referendums is also untrue. Election referendums have to comply with the laws that encompass them. If the referendum has not complied with the law then it is void to begin with. It is true that Houston, College Station, Port Lavaca, Cleveland, and Bay Town all had elections and the results were overturned in those cities by a court of law. As a matter of fact I don't know of a city's referendum election that hasn't been overturned by a court. But it was because the petition was improper due to the time it took to get the names. Usually a referendum targets an ordinance for removal, which is the difference between a referendum and an initiative. So the petitioners cover their tracks by calling it a Charter Amendment instead. (sound familiar?) But judges see that it quacks, swims and has feathers, so they call it a referendum. Then it is overruled. Arlington doesn't have referendum language in its charter therefore it will be interesting to see what the judge says, if the vote passes. But I am willing to go along with the judgment, are you? Wouldn't it just be easier to obey the law and stop at the red light? You don't have a right to break the law and run the light!