>>19948622

So what remedy can these 12 man POSSE decide?

1 Specific performance, if you agreed to do something, and accepted consideration (money) for that, then you must complete that contract.

There is a famous western movie, where a carpenter is in a bar, but he has been chained to the foundation of a building he absconded from.

2 Banishment. Leave you fuckin freak, and never come back.

3 Death. This was only for the most serious offences, ie a breach or the 5 inalienable rights, it had to be UNANIMOUS, and it had to be Just.

You were hanged, and someone would jump on you to end suffering, you had words spoken over your soul, and you were forgiven. The body was ALWAYS buried, with a sign to mark your passing.

After a while, this POSSE DUTY became onerous, and the Sherriff was appointed to enforce the LAW, in lieu of the natural posse.

Always remember the EPA ruling about the unlawful appropriation of power, that currently plague LEO world wide these days.

Law enforcement can only ever enforce LAW. Enforcement of Statute is an appropriation of power, that they never had.

Judges who decide guilt are also guilty of appropriation of power, and need to be dealt with, accordingly.

>>19948705

One should remember the separation of power, parliament, executive and judiciary, and we should refamiliarize ourselves with the role of Judges.

Judges were called JUSTICE"S for a reason, they were only there to ensure you had a fair trial, and to prevent an ABUSE OF POWER. They largely dealt with Tort.

They are supposed to decide, if, in your specific case, the application of the Law is Just, and if not, he would rule against this, thereby setting a PRECEDENT for all others to follow.

High court judges, were only supposed to decide Statute breaches, as they need an in depth knowledge of Contract law.

The Supreme court was only supposed to provide a legal definition of the laws the parliament passed, ie clear up any confusion.