Wednesday, June 08, 2005
Utah Governor De Jure Jailed
Utah Supreme Court says authority is de facto.
West Valley City Case No. C 04 06941
Utah Supreme Court Case No. 20050475-SC
On June 7, 2005, in a West Valley City Municipal Unofficial Justice court, after being denied a jury trial or witnesses on his behalf, Keith L Stoney, Unofficial Justice, sentenced Thomas B. Ginter to ten days in jail, denied his motion of appeal, subpoenas, a trial de novo, confiscated his property, and sent him to jail, in violation of all the provisions of Article I Section 12 of the Utah Constitution.
Lawrence Rey Topham, acting Governor of the State of Utah, under martial law, was then summoned to the bench by Unofficial Justice Stoney, held in contempt, sentenced to five days in jail for disobeying his Unofficial order not to practice law, and was taken to jail for helping Thomas B. Ginter prepare his defense.
A response in opposition to the petitioners writ of prohibition by the Attorney Generals office, in the Utah Supreme Court, cites State of Utah v. Sawyers, 819 P.2d 806 (Utah 1991) stating that “The Court held that under the de facto doctrine, the acts of one who assumes official authority and exercises duties under color of a valid appointment or election are valid where the community acquiesces to his authority.”
What happens when a government, federal, state, or county legislates then enforces Acts in opposition with the Constitution? It becomes de facto! And a de facto government is despotism and tyranny! Let’s view what Black's Law says about de facto.
"De facto government: One that maintains itself by a display of force against the will of the rightful legal government and is successful, at least temporarily, in overturning the institutions of the rightful legal government by setting up its own in lieu thereof."
De facto judge: A judge who functions under color of authority but whose authority is defective in some procedural form.
De facto: In fact, in deed, actually. This phrase is used to characterize an officer, a government, a past action, or a state of affairs which must be accepted for all practical purposes, but is illegal or illegitimate. Thus, an office, position or status existing under a claim or color of right such as a de facto corporation."
"De facto Doctrine will validate, on grounds of public policy and prevention of failure of public justice, the acts of officials who function under color of law."
And then, there is 'Color' of law. Black's clears the word up.
Color: An appearance, semblance, or simulacrum, as distinguished from that which is real. A prima facie or apparent right. Hence, a deceptive appearance; a plausible, assumed exterior, concealing a lack of reality; a disguise or pretext."
Under our contracts with government, the terms were written, clarified and defined by those who signed the document, the States ratifying it understanding its provisions, and the people authorizing its ratification, sensible of the limited rights so surrendered. As with any contract, the provisions are binding until changed by those authorized to change it. The ones authorized do not include the president of the United States, any congressman, a single State, or a judge including the Supreme Court. To think otherwise is to accept de facto despotism.
A de facto officer can be removed without being impeached.
The all-important "silver bullet" is not a procedure, or a law, or a theory, or a claim; it is an EDUCATED and concerned CITIZENRY, willing and able to drag the tyrants back into their Constitutional box, while they scream and cry, insult and threaten. If that doesn't do it, the only option left is to remove them from their de facto office.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that ALL men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.
-- The Declaration of Independence
"A constitution is a compact of a people with their rulers; if the rulers break the compact, the people have a right and ought to remove them and do themselves justice; but in order to enable them to do this with the greater facility, those whom the people choose at stated periods, should have the power in the last resort to determine the sense of the compact; if they determine contrary to the understanding of the people, an appeal will lie to the people at the period when the rulers are to be elected, and they will have it in their power to remedy the evil; but when this power is lodged in the hands of men independent of the people, and of their representatives, and who are not, constitutionally, accountable for their opinions, no way is left to control them but with a high hand and an outstretched arm."
--Robert Yates 1788
.
Utah Supreme Court says authority is de facto.
West Valley City Case No. C 04 06941
Utah Supreme Court Case No. 20050475-SC
On June 7, 2005, in a West Valley City Municipal Unofficial Justice court, after being denied a jury trial or witnesses on his behalf, Keith L Stoney, Unofficial Justice, sentenced Thomas B. Ginter to ten days in jail, denied his motion of appeal, subpoenas, a trial de novo, confiscated his property, and sent him to jail, in violation of all the provisions of Article I Section 12 of the Utah Constitution.
Lawrence Rey Topham, acting Governor of the State of Utah, under martial law, was then summoned to the bench by Unofficial Justice Stoney, held in contempt, sentenced to five days in jail for disobeying his Unofficial order not to practice law, and was taken to jail for helping Thomas B. Ginter prepare his defense.
A response in opposition to the petitioners writ of prohibition by the Attorney Generals office, in the Utah Supreme Court, cites State of Utah v. Sawyers, 819 P.2d 806 (Utah 1991) stating that “The Court held that under the de facto doctrine, the acts of one who assumes official authority and exercises duties under color of a valid appointment or election are valid where the community acquiesces to his authority.”
What happens when a government, federal, state, or county legislates then enforces Acts in opposition with the Constitution? It becomes de facto! And a de facto government is despotism and tyranny! Let’s view what Black's Law says about de facto.
"De facto government: One that maintains itself by a display of force against the will of the rightful legal government and is successful, at least temporarily, in overturning the institutions of the rightful legal government by setting up its own in lieu thereof."
De facto judge: A judge who functions under color of authority but whose authority is defective in some procedural form.
De facto: In fact, in deed, actually. This phrase is used to characterize an officer, a government, a past action, or a state of affairs which must be accepted for all practical purposes, but is illegal or illegitimate. Thus, an office, position or status existing under a claim or color of right such as a de facto corporation."
"De facto Doctrine will validate, on grounds of public policy and prevention of failure of public justice, the acts of officials who function under color of law."
And then, there is 'Color' of law. Black's clears the word up.
Color: An appearance, semblance, or simulacrum, as distinguished from that which is real. A prima facie or apparent right. Hence, a deceptive appearance; a plausible, assumed exterior, concealing a lack of reality; a disguise or pretext."
Under our contracts with government, the terms were written, clarified and defined by those who signed the document, the States ratifying it understanding its provisions, and the people authorizing its ratification, sensible of the limited rights so surrendered. As with any contract, the provisions are binding until changed by those authorized to change it. The ones authorized do not include the president of the United States, any congressman, a single State, or a judge including the Supreme Court. To think otherwise is to accept de facto despotism.
A de facto officer can be removed without being impeached.
The all-important "silver bullet" is not a procedure, or a law, or a theory, or a claim; it is an EDUCATED and concerned CITIZENRY, willing and able to drag the tyrants back into their Constitutional box, while they scream and cry, insult and threaten. If that doesn't do it, the only option left is to remove them from their de facto office.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that ALL men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.
-- The Declaration of Independence
"A constitution is a compact of a people with their rulers; if the rulers break the compact, the people have a right and ought to remove them and do themselves justice; but in order to enable them to do this with the greater facility, those whom the people choose at stated periods, should have the power in the last resort to determine the sense of the compact; if they determine contrary to the understanding of the people, an appeal will lie to the people at the period when the rulers are to be elected, and they will have it in their power to remedy the evil; but when this power is lodged in the hands of men independent of the people, and of their representatives, and who are not, constitutionally, accountable for their opinions, no way is left to control them but with a high hand and an outstretched arm."
--Robert Yates 1788
.
Comments:
Post a Comment
