Interview with a “Common Law Grand Jury” hopeful

A very interesting overview of the “Common Law Grand Jury”

Good questions… And lousy answers.

The “Common Law Grand Jury” is doomed to failure.

And they still cite Scalia’s ruling, totally misunderstanding it. Hilarious…

So they sent a declaration to the Courts and the Courts will ignore it, then what… Nothing will happen. The “Common Law Grand Jury” is nothing more than a group of like-minded people petitioning the Courts.

Getting into the courts is a completely different process… Duh….

The Courts have set aside or ignored the petitions… Wow, a great success…

As a practical manner, what can you do? Blah, blah, blah. Citing Article VI of the NY State Constitution… Yawn… Such a random argument.

Of course, the Common Law Grand Jury will complain and nothing will happen.

They do not believe in standing or course of actions. Common law: Injury requires remedy… Hilarious ignorance. Injury is what also defines the legal system’s concept of standing, but the injury has to be real and specific not general.

They are confusing the right to petition for redress of grievances with a right for redress of grievances.

The reported declined to pursue the story as there was really none.


2 thoughts on “Interview with a “Common Law Grand Jury” hopeful

  1. A better question would be, where is the legal logic behind the Common Law Grand Jury arguments? There in none. They are nothing more that a group of like-minded people who are trying to petition the court for relief to which they are not entitled.

Comments are closed.