From Mark Adams, JD/MBA and Kirk MacKenzie–important articles

Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 14:06:49 -0600

Mark and Kirk;

Thanks for doing what you are doing to work on Judicial Accountability.

—–Original Message—–
From: Mark Adams
Sent: Jan 25, 2016 1:46 PM
To: “” , “”
Cc: “”

Thanks, Kirk.

Unfortunately, as usual and by design, the commentators do not realize how justice was supposed to be secured because they do not understand government nor are they aware of the means to control it.  A brief explanation follows:

What is government other than making and enforcing rules?

So, who makes the rules?

Laws can be made by popular vote as in direct democracies or by the vote of elected representatives in representative democracies, like the U.S. once was.  However, if the votes are counted in secret, you don’t have a democratic government because the people who control the secret vote count are the real law making rulers, not the voters.

So, who enforces the rules?

In any democracy, the people must have the power to enforce the law; otherwise, the people are ruled by an aristocracy which can enforce the law as they want.

In Britain and the U.S. before the fascists took over, any person could institute criminal charges against those whom he believed broke the law, just like in Ancient Athens, and if the majority of people on the grand jury thought that the charges showed probable cause that the law had been broken, the person bringing the charges could prosecute the defendant(s) before a trial jury or hire an attorney to do so or hope and pray that the public prosecutor would do so.

Before the fascists took over the U.S., the facts and law would be argued before a jury of citizens who would determine whether or not the defendant(s) were guilty, and a guilty verdict had to be unanimous, an improvement over Athens where the majority ruled even at trial.

Yes, juries could nullify law in a democratic justice system because the people rule.  Not guilty due to self-defense, duress, etc. came from jury verdicts, not legislatures.  By the way, alcohol prohibition was repealed because it became nearly impossible for the government to win any conviction.

So, how do you restore justice and good government?

In order to restore justice and good government, you have to restore the means provided in the U.S. Constitution for the people to rule.  To restore the power to throw bad representatives out of office, the votes must be counted in public.  To restore justice, the right to petition for redress of grievances must once again mean that any person can present information to a grand jury and ask for the jurors to vote to investigate further or indict and then, be once again empowered to pursue such investigation or indictment.  Finally, to restore justice, the right to trial by jury must be restored in all proceedings in which the rights to life, liberty or property are at issue, and this must include rights which have been renamed as privileges in order for the ruling elite to take them without a jury trial.

Since this fundamental information has been eliminated from the ruling elite’s “educational” system, few can imagine how government was supposed to be controlled in our Republic, but I’ve done a lot more research than most.  For a U.S. Supreme Court case which talks about the fundamental right to secure justice by bringing a petition for redress to the grand juries, see Blyew v. U.S. at

Make sure that you read the dissent so that you understand that we were not supposed to have to beg a prosecuting prince to present evidence to the grand juries, but instead, we were supposed to be able to present our petitions for redress of grievances for crimes committed directly to the grand juries!

Also, note that the opinion doesn’t say that a prosecutor can obstruct the right to petition, but instead, it holds that since there was no Federal law criminalizing murder at that time, the murderers could not be prosecuted in Federal court at that time.

This case resulted in the passage of the Federal laws prohibiting violations of rights under color of law so that murderers and prosecutors who covered up murder could be prosecuted!  See the following statutes:

18 U.S.C. § 241 provides that a conspiracy to violate rights under color of law is a felony.  See

18 U.S.C. § 242 provides that a violation of rights under color of law is a felony.  See

18 U.S.C. § 4 provides that any person who knows of the commission of a felony and fails to report it to the appropriate authorities has committed a felony. See

18 U.S.C. § 3 provides that any person who helps conceal any criminal offense has committed a criminal offense.  See

Mark A. Adams JD/MBA

P.S. I explain this in the attached speech.  By the way, the Feds leaned on this Tea Party group and forced it to shut down shortly after I gave this speech.  Ironically, they were telling Congress that they were not doing such things at the very same time, but who is going to hold the Feds liable for lying to Congress when the means to do so have been stolen?

P.P.S. There are still two ways to enforce the law.  One was designed to allow the public to protect themselves from both criminals and tyrants, and it is still perfectly legal.  The other was designed to help banksters steal property without having to worry about pesky juries getting in the way, and it can still be used.  Unfortunately, almost no one knows about either of these means.

Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2016 12:58:03 -0700

Most Americans believe the judicial system, for all its faults, at least attempts to provide justice, and does so in most cases. Given the Hage, Bundy, Hammond, and Drakes Bay Farm cases, perhaps it is time for a reassessment. Here are two more case studies to consider.
Watch “Making A Murderer” if you have Netflix.  This 10-episode series incredibly combines an exposé of our judicial system with a riveting real-life story. I now understand the term “binge viewing”. Once started, you will want to watch it to the end. The injustice exposed by this series has led to national attention, and over one-half million signatures to reopen the case. You will thank me for the suggestion.
The story of Dr. Richard Fine is another case. Dr. Fine may be new to most of you. The link provided in the forwarded email below will get you started. Linda is a friend and former fellow UWSA member.
(from JoAnne, I have just published an article on life of Dr. Fine, just search him on this blog–he is a true hero).
Begin forwarded message:

From: Linda
Subject: Hello
Date: January 23, 2016
To: “Kirk MacKenzie” <>
I wanted to share these articles with you to show why there is no justice within our court system.
If you can, please share the links below with others.  Thanks.
Warm regards,

1 thought on “From Mark Adams, JD/MBA and Kirk MacKenzie–important articles

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s