Laws as they
should be and as they were 200 years ago
People today don't realize
there was a logic to the court system 200 years ago which is missing today. This misunderstanding
has caused changes in the laws and these changes often force law enforcement
agents to break the law themselves.
When a search warrant, for example, was to be issued on a felony violation
it was always by a superior court judge and never a lower one such as a municipal
I read last month that even a justice of the peace can issue search warrants
and that is just crazy. All the foul
ups and complaints about violations of rights during searches would be cut in half or less if felonies
started out and stayed at the superior court level as they always used to. I
am certain that these days the higher courts, as well as the police, must get into the middle of some
bad situations because of it.
The objective is to assign
a crime from the very start to the most qualified judge.
The way it is now one minute a justice of the peace may be performing
a marriage service and then the next minute dealing the issuance of warrants on crazed murderers. Am I the only person that sees this problem?
Also, the higher courts deal with those such as drug lords and understand
the issues involved. It's dangerous to have a lower court justice involved in
something he knows less about than those judges in Superior courts. There are
other reasons as well such as the potential for corruption in the lower courts
being far greater. The information in warrants can potentially put a person
in prison for the rest of their life. You have a plethora of people
in the lower courts with knowledge that can can cause a Waco type situation
as a result of a clerk talking to friends.
It absurd to think the information is going to remain within the courtroom walls.
The lower judges often have
to believe everything law enforcement
tells them without having studied those laws which a Superior court judge
has. He is supposed be in the legal process to
exercise judgment and that is impossible without proper knowledge of those crimes.
Besides, most judges in the municipal court don't want to deal with hardened
criminals and serious crimes. It places them into a position of acting as a superior
court judge (and next they will probably be wanting the same pay).
What makes this insidious
is that you have people (judges) who are unqualified starting Felony criminal
procedures in place of Superior court judges.
Basic to American law, it's
a violation for a lower court to ever interfere in the actions of a higher court.
The Superior courts powers are being usurped by the lower courts. What this
causes is a loss of the respect by the citizens who sense the outside intervention
simply as a corruption of the court system.
When an arrest warrant is
served there has to be a court date already set and of course it needs
to be kept in secret within the court. Otherwise it is just kidnapping. A warrant
is to bring a 'reluctant' person to trial and so obviously there has to be trail
set up to take them to.
Extradition from other states
does not require it because an immediate arraignment used to be made as soon as they
entered the next state. This next part does not apply to Federal prisoners. Judges
used to have to get up in the middle of the night to arraign people brought
in from out of state. There was one Virginia judge who got upset a lot because
the timing of the stage meant that the Marshals with prisoners could only use the
ferry at midnight. So he had to get up almost every other night and weekends
at about 1:30 am for court at about 2:30 am so that the law enforcement personnel could then
get on the early morning stage with their prisoners. (They had to go through
this in each state, I think, to keep it legal.) Then it was too late for the judge
to go home to sleep so he would stay awake and then fall asleep the next day in his court. He quit
and the next two judges also quit when they went through about the same thing.
Then we got a tough old buzzard that needed only two or three hours sleep each night.
If a transported prisoner
is not legally under arrest and arraigned by that state when the Marshall takes
them through it then it is a form of kidnapping.
I better explain to you what
evolves if arraignment is not made in each state they pass through. Since that
law enforcement officer who is transporting the criminals has no legal authority
from that state they must use their personal will and power instead. This creates
the domination they need for the necessary control of the prisoners. This is
what turns good cops in a short amount of time into bad cops. It is almost inevitable.
This is going to upset more
people than anything I put down but the same person that takes out a warrant
needs to be, and always was 200 years ago, the one that actually served
the warrant. He knows more about the situation than anyone so he knows where
the contraband is located. That narrows the search so it doesn't become a 'fishing
trip' with everything taken just to make certain they have the evidence, thus
being a huge violation of the persons rights. That officer also knows more about the person
and hence the dangers involved. Whether others know the dangers involved or
not it is a crime having them serve the warrant. The search warrant allows the one person
to go in (with deputies) and that is all. Search warrants used to say some thing
like: '___ ___ has permission to search....' giving permission to only the person
who took out the warrant.
If the person that took out
the warrant is not present then others are liable to over react and protect themselves by shooting first and finding out later that they made a horrible mistake
that would have been prevented if the person who took out the warrant had served
You hear about police getting
the wrong address all too often with disastrous outcomes and this happens much
less if the the person that got the evidence also got the warrant and then served it.
When it is the wrong house
the person inside isn't usually breaking the law so they assume it is not the police and stand
up for their rights against what is obvious to them to be criminals intent on
It may be the correct house
but officers have in the past killed persons simply because the officer
that took out the warrant was not along and did not think to tell them that
a deaf person was living there, etc.
Right near the top of our
rights is that of being safe on our own property and with our possessions. The
lax attitude that pervades law enforcement now with regards to searches is appalling
and should not be allowed.
I would have to find an old
search warrant to show you how specific they were. If anything was violated
that was not specifically on that warrant they would arrest the officers instead.
It had to be on the warrant or it was not taken. It was theft otherwise and
it was usually fully prosecuted. Then on top of all this the judge often threw
the book at them simply for creating a bad impression in others concerning
the legal system. (The English were looking for any violation of our own
laws by our own law enforcement in order to establish us as being a lawless
or pirate country so that they could invade us.)
We got rid of that kind of
abuse when we kicked out the English who would send search warrants from England
authorizing them take what was needed. They would come into homes and often
take everything in it leaving only the bare walls.
The true reason for the laws
being like this is the following.
As strange as it may now
sound the way it used be to was to make every action of the entire legal
system completely legal. Otherwise the criminals ended up on both sides of
the legal system. Having them on one side was bad enough.
(This was all remembered
in about four hours time and that is an improvement over a month ago when I could
only recall an issue similar to one of these every three or four days. A certain
level has just been passed from trying to understand the laws (as I knew them
when I was Thomas Jefferson) and to the point where I understand the laws even
better than I did in that life. Not just remember them but actually understand
them better than I did then.)
© 2005-8 John Pinil