Tolerating Injustice

Yesterday, a front page headline for southern Utah's socialist rag, The Spectrum, reads, in large print: "JEFFS CHARGED". According to the article, Washington County has hopped onto the illegal bandwagon, and filed charges of rape as an accomplice against Warren Jeffs. The case alleges that Jeffs encouraged, commanded, or intentionally aided another to have sexual intercourse with a "victim" without the victim's consent and that he wasn't even physically present at the time the intercourse took place.

The criminalization of Warren Jeffs is a perfect example of the American justice system gone astray. Which one of the prosecutors have the authority to file charges in the first place? The States of America are constitutional republics where the governments are limited to certain powers and authorities expressly constituted in their respective constitutions. No constitution exists giving government authority to charge citizens of committing crime. Period. The very concept of city, county, state, and federal prosecutors is unconstitutional.

The American justice system is set up so people who feel their rights have been violated may sue the offender for restitution. As the plaintiff, they then carry the burden of proving that a right was violated and that the accused committed the crime. Likewise, people who are accused of violating a right are guarantied the opportunity to face their accusers and to be presumed innocent until a conviction occurs. If the plaintiff is unable or unwilling to prove guilt, the accused is declared innocent. It is as simple as that.

The problem is rooted in the uninformed American citizenry. It is against the law for governments to assume responsibility and obligation outside those privileges expressed in their constituting documents. Yet, how many 'Americans' know this? When most of them hear it, they reject it and argue against it. Were they willing to attempt to prove me wrong, they would discover the truth for themselves.

America has been deceived by the subtle tolerance of the British Accredited Registry, or BAR. At first glance, the BAR offers a proved technique for the application of statute law among the people. The greatest flaw with this theory is that it depends entirely upon a sovereign government such as a monarchy or some form of socialism. In a republic the individual people are sovereign, making the BAR concept incompatible with the American justice system.

Statute law itself is an abominable injustice. The concept of redefining words to include actions unrelated should not be tolerated. It exists for the sole purpose of retribution and is a hindrance to the American justice system. Making rape, non-consensual sexual intercourse, a legal term including consensual sex between people of different specified ages, or encouraging, commanding, or intentionally aiding another to have sexual intercourse, for instance.

It is distressing that a legislature would even be allowed to write such heinous statutes when "its jurisdiction is limited to certain enumerated objects, which concern all the members of the republic, but which are not to be attained by the separate provisions of any"*. If the people would stop tolerating the crimes of the government and start enforcing the constitutions, there would be a lot less contentions, fears, and anger in this world.

Every day judges issue warrants, "law enforcers" make arrests, bonds are set, and convictions declared, all without the due process of law. Criminals are made when no crime has even been committed. It is an injustice the American people have come to expect.

If Jane Doe IV's rights were violated by Warren Jeffs, and she can prove it, let her sue him, the way the American justice system requires.

* James Madison, The Federalist # 14