Common Law and Sovereignty-Not The Answer!

Because of my occupation I have been around the sovereignty movement for most of 30 years.  Yes it’s that old and has been around a long time.   Just like the old time snake oil salesmen, I’ve seen the sovereignty concept pitched for use for just about everything.

As for the current common law/sovereignty movement, the underlying desire and hunger for change and something better which is systemic to the current conditions we find ourselves in today is the foundation being used for personal sovereignty being pitched as the way to gain fulfillment of those desires and hunger pangs.

The problem with that is it is purely based on a lack of knowledge and the failure to be open minded enough to not see all effecting factors.  There is no such thing as personal sovereignty!  Sovereignty is supreme power or authority over something and that something is usually control or the governing of a group of people.  Truthfully we don’t and can never have supreme authority or power over these bodies we inhabit at all.  The mere fact we can’t control the health or death of it should be sufficient to make that point obvious.

Back to a more direct point, let’s begin with an overly simplified investigation of what is “common law”.  Common law is what arose in the 12th and 13th centuries as civilizations, especially the civilizations on the British Isle, came out of the “dark ages”.  The justice system that existed prior to that was a chaotic system based on feudal law over ridden by the authority of the monarchy.  Under that system each feudal estate was under the control of the local landowner who set the laws for his estate but owed allegiance to and was subject to the taxation of the crown.

As an example of how the free man faced justice, If I was to steal an apple on one estate I might be made to do sufficient extra work until I paid for that apple with the amount of work determined by the head of the feudal estate.  On another estate for the theft of an apple I might be placed in some type of confinement for 10 years.

The system of justice was riddled with inequity.  To attempt to solve the problem the English system began evolving not because of the inequity for the common people but because those of titled nobility got tired of the burdensome actions of the monarchy.

This evolving was manifested through the creation of certain documents that specified that limited the power of the monarchy and established certain rights for the nobles which bled down to the common people.

What came out of the discontent of the nobles began, as far as the legal system was concerned, with basically three different courts being established within the English system.  Laws were drawn up and put into place by a two house parliamentary system.

It was the duty of the crown to enforce the laws while the courts decided how those laws were applied.

As the courts decided, or issued rulings, on how those laws were to be applied in various circumstances those rulings then became how they were used in applying the laws to future cases.   This then is truly what is “common law” and to be more specific the common law as we know it is really something called case based law.

[Remember I said this was an overly simplified view so don’t ding too hard with the comments!]

What most people today are thinking about when they refer to “common law” is more akin to the inalienable rights that Jefferson described in the Declaration of Independence.  They are trying to say that each of us at birth have certain rights that should be sacrosanct.  They see that even that “rights” are being abused and infringed upon by those abusers of power.  They desire to regain a semblance of being in control and they look for a way to protect those rights and make them inviolable.

They have reasoned that the people have a right to do whatever necessary to seek out the way to make them inviolable.  Someone then came along and said look I have the solution and its based upon the “common law”.  But the “common law” that they seem to think exists, doesn’t and never has.

The promoters of this approach then came up with something they are calling a common law jury. The create this system for creating and running these juries but when they try to give it legitimacy through historical precedent that they go astray.

Since there has never been anything even close to what they are trying to create or remotely conceived of in any document, for them to say the power rests in common law is a fallacy and deception.

They point to the U.S. grand jury system and use a single statement by a single judge as proof.  However, if you research the case the statement was made in regards to you find it was referring to a very limited definition of a single characteristic of the grand jury system.

The grand jury that exists in the U.S. Constitution was created to correct a flaw in the English case law or common law system.  In the English system at the time of the American Revolution the representative of the English crown had the sole authority to decide who and with what crime a person was charged with.  This of course led to abuse of power by the representatives of the crown, hence, the need to limit the power of the representatives of the government.

To correct that abuse of power problem the founders of this country established a panel of peers system to decide and determine when there was cause enough for a person to be charged and tried of a crime.  The way that system is implemented has evolved through the years influenced by our three branch and checks and balances system.

To begin the process a representative of the government (Federal prosecutor) has to convince a Federal district judge that there is sufficient reason to believe that it would be in the best interest of the welfare of the people to seat a grand jury.  The prosecutor has to prove that it is in the best interest of the people to further determine whether there is sufficient evidence to warrant charging a person with a crime.

Once a judge is satisfied he will authorize the calling of jurors to make up a grand jury.  A grand jury is composed of between 16 and 23 members and most times with 2-3 alternates.  To protect the “target” of a grand jury investigation and the identity of those  testifying in case there is no indictment the work and session of a grand jury are secret.

That doesn’t mean that the “target” of a grand jury isn’t made aware of the presence of a grand jury investigating something about them as all grand juries issues a letter, called a target letter, to those that the grand jury will be focusing upon.  Those targeted by the grand jury are given the opportunity if they so choose to appear before the grand and give testimony but the government cannot compel them to testify.

A grand jury does not have unlimited time to make up their minds whether to indict or not.   A Federal grand jury is limited to 18 months plus one 6 month extension to reach agreement on an indictment or fail to indict.  To reach indictment only requires that 12 members of the 16-23 members of the grand jury reach agreement for an indictment.

The biggest problem with the grand jury system is a tendency for the grand jurors to believe that even if there really isn’t enough evidence to prove the crime that the next phrase will correct any mistakes they may make.  [Hence, the old remark that a Federal prosecutor could indict a ham sandwich for murder.]  Once a “target” is indicted they are then arrested, processed and then goes through the long period until he gets his day in court to face the determination of whether they are found to be innocent or guilty.

However, the fallacy in the notion that the grand jury’s findings are cushioned by the system is that simply having to endure the arrest and trial process usually winds up destroying the person even if they turn out to be not guilty.

What the common law/sovereignty movement is trying to do today is create some kind of pseudo-grand jury.  However, there is no grounds of legitimacy or legality for the existence of such a jury.  The minimum that would be needed for such a jury to have any power would be societal acceptance, which is sorely lacking. Without a basis to draw the power for simply existence from then the actions of the so-called common law jury becomes nothing more than kangaroo justice and vigilantism.

The more they try to “indict” people on grounds not truly supported by legal evidence but instead upon human emotion, the more they will be seen as a lunatic fringe element as bad if not worse than the ones they claim to be against.   You cannot end tyranny by using the tactics of a tyrant yourself.

They try to convince others and justify themselves by speaking to those longings, desires and characteristics which are inherit traits in all people to want to be free.   They try to justify that because there have been those who have been prone to abuse of power that the only way to correct the situation is to “take justice into your own hands”.

All this will do over time is lead to violence in some form or the other by either members of the movement itself or by the government in “protection” of those being targeted by the common law juries.

Those basic human traits at the heart of all of this can, in most cases, be defined as rights.   These would of course include the right to exist and be, the right to do as one pleases as long as what you do doesn’t infringe upon another individuals right to do as they please, and the right to do whatever one wants to make themselves happy as long as you do not infringe upon others’ right to find happiness as well.  These are the most common of those human traits to which we should be entitled to simply because we exist as a human.  These are also the inalienable rights that I spoke of earlier that Jefferson saw as so important, so fundamental, that he addressed those same rights in the Declaration of Independence.

I agree with the desire that change needs to come but disagree with the how it should come to pass.  The United States was created to be the bellwether for this planet to show how a nation can be a leader in the area of personal liberties.  However, a few men from the very beginning have tried their very greatest to usurp that power and distort it to their own use creating a delay in the achievement of our nation’s highest and best purpose.

Change will come when the people themselves have become weary of being the downtrodden.   No person can be forced to succumb to the will of another without his own willingness to allow it.

Are there times when there is a price to pay for taking such a stand? Absolutely!   Is it too high a price to pay?  Never!

The only thing that keeps one from standing strong against tyranny is fear.   Fear mostly of death and dying.  If one can overcome that fear then the battle is won.

If tomorrow morning when the sun arose 200 million Americans said, “no more will we allow our liberties to be trampled”, those who are attempting to subject us to their will could not ever create enough force to be successful.

All it will take for lasting permanent change is a leader to appear that will guide this nation toward a new beginning, a new life, a new dawn where the rights of the individual not the rights of the masses is the primary focus of this country.   A leader that will be the captain that will steer this country into an era of economic growth and prosperity.  A leader with vision and integrity.

Such people do exist!  We had such a leader to some degree in John Kennedy but he was too much too soon without the support that he needed to make him unstoppable.  Now is the time, we only need to find the person.  LET THE SEARCH BEGIN!

Asa

Who is Neil Keenan?

I’ve been sitting on the sidelines watching both the common law/sovereign movement and Neil Keenan.  Neil has bothered me every since he popped onto the scene but it seemed harmless enough in the beginning so I just let it go.

However, I’m beginning to see a side of Neil’s work that truly has the hairs on my neck standing on end.  With my gut telling me to get off the dime I did some checking.

Since I know Neil filed that global accounts case (I checked out the global accounts right away and we’ll get to that later) I started with the Federal Court system.  First thing I found was that Neil F. Keenan not only had been involved in the global accounts case in 2011 but he had also been involved in 6 other Federal civil lawsuits dating back to as early as 1986.  Of those six cases two were filed in Rhode Island and the other 4 in the Florida Southern District.

I’ll come back to those Federal cases momentarily.  The Florida/Rhode Island connection led me to search both of those states for Neil F. Keenan.  In Rhode Island I found Neil F. Keenan and Neil Keenan Associates in Newport, Rhode Island establishing Neil’s connection to Rhode Island which was confirmed by one of the Federal civil cases, more on that later.   Additionally, when I checked for Neil F. Keenan in Rhode Island I found numerous case of DUI, driving on suspended license, driving on revoked license, driving with no license, etc.   In and of itself is not all that damning except for the fact that it shows an attitude of disregard for the law.

When I did a check for Neil in Florida I got more of a surprise.  In 1983 Neil F. Keenan, date of birth 9/10/51, place of birth Rhode Island, was charged and sentenced to the Florida Department of Corrections for trafficing in cocaine, delivery of controlled substances, and cocaine possession with intent for sale or purchase.

In those Federal lawsuits, anything older than about 1996 the actual case materials is not available through the electronic access system so any information beyond filing date, closing date and what the nature of the filing is would have to be done in person at the actual court where they were filed.

The oldest Federal case was in 1986 and it was a motion to vacate sentence filing, filed in Florida Southern District-case #86-cv-00325, and may have been related to his 1983 drug conviction or it may not have been.  Either way it was an attempt to vacate or overturn a sentence that probably was issued by a Federal court.  The next newest case was in 1987, 87-cv-00922, and was a Habeas Corpus filing and can only be related to some issue whereby a court had control of Keenan.

Moving to the next newest, 93-cv-00785, the case was titled Keenan v. United States it also was a motion to vacate sentence.  What bothers me is that it is a filing against the United States for vacating a sentence implying that Keenan was sentenced at some point by the Federal system but I have not been able to locate any cases that would have resulted in him being Federally sentenced.  But because of the way the Federal Rules of Procedure are structured a motion to vacate can only be filed after you receive a sentence and for no other reason.

There were two cases in 1995, both filed in Rhode Island district. The first 95-cv-00511 was filed by Neil, plaintiff, against Carla Jo Wagenstein, Donald J. Blackburn, John R. Simpson, and the USA, defendants.   It was a civil rights violation filing.  What bothers me is that all of the defendants were all represented by someone from the US attorney’s office which means they were either all government employees or were witnesses that may have provided testimony that were being sued.  Results was a judgement in favor of the defendants in the case.

The other 1995 case, 95-cv-00557, Keenan v. U.S. Parole Commission, and was a motion to vacate sentence which was ultimately denied. Here again is a filing of a motion to vacate sentence.  Federal Rules of Procedure limits motions to vacate sentence to one attempt and placing a time limit on how long you have to file.  I think the limitation is 1 year but I’d have to check.  Since there is a single time limitation for any particular sentence, the multiple filings to vacate sentence implies that there should be multiple sentences given to Neil F. Keenan.

The last case is the interesting one.  It was filed in 1998 by Neil Keenan and Neil Keenan Associates against a slew of people and entities including Aer Lingus and British Airways.  The suit alleges that Neil got into business with some people who became greedy and decided to get Neil out of the picture so that could profit from his connections without having to give him any money.   Neil contended in the lawsuit, which was filed in Florida, that some of his partners got him arrested in the Dominican Republic by planting drugs in his hotel room.  When I read about what Neil F. Keenan got into with these guys it rings so much like basically an attempted quick money scheme in which the prime players turned on one another out of greed.

It would also seem that the people Neil F. Keenan got into business with were somewhat on the seedy side.  Doesn’t say much for business ethics unless of course the kind of business you were conducting would call for working with those types of individuals.

Last we have Neil’s filing on the global accounts in 2011.  As we all know it was filed with great fanfare in the New York Southern District.  The interesting thing is that less than a year later the suit quietly went away when Neil filed a letter of dismissal with the court.  Had Neil not filed the letter of dismissal he would have had to within days of the dismissal filing have to have been able to prove to the court that they had jurisdiction.  Problem is that the court wouldn’t have asked for that unless they were already pretty much convinced they didn’t have jurisdiction.  Considering the defendants that were named in the lawsuit, I agree, the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case so failing to prove to the court that they had jurisdiction it would have been dismissed with prejudice meaning that it would not ever be able to file again.

I find it strange that the matter of jurisdiction wasn’t addressed before the case was filed.   But seeing the work Neil F. Keenan did on the civil filings where he represented himself I can understand how it could have been ignored.

Now for the global accounts.  When I first heard about Neil F. Keenan and these accounts I did some digging on that supposed gold.  Here’s the problem I have.  The official records at the Treasury and Bureau of Engraving and Printing does not show that they ever printed sufficient notes or bonds to have been used for giving to the Chinese in exchange for their gold.  Since there is no official record either they were printed off record or were printed by some other agency (CIA?).   Either way with no record of them being legitimate notes and bonds the U.S. will never acquiesce to them being real and will always say they are fakes.   Therefore, there is no way to ever convince a reputable court of jurisdiction to order the U.S. to pay up or produce gold.

If the intent was to rip off the gold from the very beginning which is what is implied by Neil F. Keenan then don’t you think that the CIA would be smart enough to bury one or more “flaws” in the printing to always be able to declare any of them that were presented for payment as being fakes?   Who would have been sharp enough to notice that the certificates given in exchange for the gold was fakes?  Now you have fake certificates and no way to prove that the gold was ever taken by the U.S. government.  Give the bad guys credit, they have been around doing these kinds of things hundreds if not thousands of years.  Anyone doing what they have done this long is not stupid.

Additionally, I have found numerous cases where these notes, bonds, supporting documentation, and even the tins they were supposedly transported in are being truly certified as fakes.  I had to laugh I found one case where the box had a flag on it with 50 stars.  Hawaii didn’t become the 50th state until 1959.  Give me a break.

If you go here: http://www.rense.com/general41/lost.htm, you will find that Rense.com did a piece on these things back in 2003 which includes a couple of news stories on them.  Further searching for things like Chinese gold treasury notes turns up lots of interesting tidbits.

As for the off ledger account book and the blue book, until someone has them authenticated using paper, ink, and binding analysis I’m not accepting them as anything more than produced documentation to help sell the idea.   You will find that the ones that have been certified fakes usually comes complete with documentation and coins that seem to prove the authenticity of the notes and bonds.  Problem is that often the coins have flaws or errors or are of a denomination or design that has never been minted.  The documentation although made to look old and appropriate always fails the testing done by the independent experts.

As for the common law/sovereign problem I’ll address that in another post.