"The first thing we do," said the character in
Shakespeare's Henry VI, is "kill all the lawyers"
"The Coastal Post", Marin County, California, 8/27/90.
Our Stunning Power
* * * * * * * * *
His eyes twinkle at me across the cafe table. A
conversation with him is an adventure. "I don't understand these people . . . these
government bureaucrats!", the seventy something year old man says with a machine gun
fire delivery. "They have pictures of their CHILDREN on their desks!" A brief
wave of sadness clouds his blue eyes, but quickly the fire returns. "What are they
DOING to this country? They are sending their children into bondage! A human being doesn't
DO those things to his own flesh and blood!" Meet an American patriot and
Constitutionalist of the highest caliber.
Godfrey Lehman knows a lot about America . . . what
it was, and what it could be. Perhaps no one understands the American jury system better
than Godfrey does. In fact, his booklet on the jury system USED to be standard issue to
every jury candidate here in Marin Coun- ty. It is an educational and entertaining piece
of writing called "What You Need To Know For Jury Duty."
For years, jury candidates were given Godfrey's
meticulously accurate and factual little booklet. It sat in the Marin County Jury Room
from 1974 until 1985. Its printing was patriotically sponsored by the Independent
Insurance Agents of Marin. San Francisco Superior Court Judge Leland J. Lazarus said in
the booklet's introduction that it was ". . . a discerning and very comprehensive
look at the entire jury system as it exists and functions today." Many thousands of
people must have read it in the course of their civic duty as jurors.
In 1985 an ominous thing happened to Godfrey's jury
booklet. A woman attorney named Carol Heymeyer read Godfrey's information on "jury
nul- lification." She went whining to Marin Superior Court Judge Richard Breiner
complaining about this absolutely factual and accurate infor- mation that had been read by
Marin jurors for more than ten years. She and Judge Breiner huddled in a mordant frenzy
and the judge pro- nounced judgment on Godfrey's booklet. He said it should be "made
into firewood" and burned. A Marin County Superior Court Judge ordered a book burned!
Godfrey likes to point out that Breiner is (as is
Lehman himself) Jewish. "This man, sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United
State (sic) of America, spoke like a Nazi!" Godfrey taps the table intently. "He
would burn truth to increase his own power!"
The important that you absolutely must remember is
that Godfrey Lehman's work on jury duty IS the absolute, factual, and historical truth! It
is the volatile issue of "jury nullification" that drives judges and prosecutors
up the walls. But it is the same issue that has been driving them up the walls for more
than THREE HUNDRED years! The jury has the right, yea the three hundred year old
obligation, to nullify a bad law by setting a defendant free DESPITE what the evil or
unjust law says!
Quite simply put, you, as a juror, may declare a
defendant NOT GUILTY if you believe that he is being tried under an UNFAIR law! Stunning
news! Mindboggling implications! And folks, the judges and prosecutors just do not want
you to grasp this ironclad fact!
If you don't firmly and conscientiously agree with
the marijuana laws . . . you can lawfully vote a defendant NOT GUILTY! If you don't agree
with the Income Tax . . . you can lawfully vote a defendant NOT GUILTY! If you don't agree
with a drunk driving law that puts citi- zens' reputations in the clutches of machines . .
. you can lawfully vote NOT GUILTY! If you sincerely can't agree with a particular child
custody law . . . you can vote the defendant NOT GUILTY! If you be- lieve that a person
has the right to carry a gun in self defense but a county ordinance says she can't carry a
firearm . . . you can lawfully vote the defendant NOT GUILTY! If you sincerely believe a
person has a right to call another a "honky," "kike,"
"spic," or "nigger," (even if you wouldn't do so), yet some law says
that this is illegal "hate language" . . . you can still vote the defendant NOT
So the next time the judge tells you that you are to
"judge the facts in the case and not the law" you will know that this judge,
this black robed human being in front of you, is very likely a treacherous LIAR. Evil
comes in no more contemptible package than a corrupt judge. The Third Reich had thousands
Be ready! Because the judge will lie to you! If you
are any kind of an American, you will realize that you, and those other jur- ors, are the
sovereigns, the rulers, in that courtroom! The judge can "instruct" you that you
cannot declare a law unfair and unjust! You can vote the defendant NOT GUILTY, and thusly
judge the law as unfair. So the next time you are called for jury duty, realize the great
power that is being handed to you. You, as a juror, are more powerful than the President
of the United States as you frustrate an unfair law! The least you can do is
"hang" the jury with your vote of NOT GUILTY. Or twelve, who truly understand,
can acquit. This is how we will retrieve our Nation from the tyrants and fools who rule us
How come the guardians of our law, the lawyers and judges, lie conceal, deny, and violate our rights?
Are they evil or just plain ignorant?
In either case, have they not betrayed us?
Why do we have to "fight" for rights guaranteed and secured by our Constitutions
-- both state and national?
Shouldn't they be recognized, respected and automatically honored by these same lawyers
and judges whose chosen vocation is the law?
Is this an honorable profession?
Are its members worthy of and entitled to our respect?
If it has become corrupt, should its want of honor and integrity be exposed by and for
those who are or may be victimized by it?
Originally posted to FIJA by Patriotz@aol.com
Look at this STUPID, childish letter from one of the nation's
From: "Edwin C. Hamada, Esq" EHamada@HamadaLaw.COM
To: "Christian Party" firstname.lastname@example.org
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2000 11:56 AM
Subject: Re: Jews
Well, John Knight. You sound like you are wearing one of those white things
around your head, with those little holes where your sightless eyes fit?
I've seen them from time to time especially in the south, worn by other White
while I was Marching and getting spit at and all that other good stuff, like
my friend Jim Reeb, a minister, on a dark street in Selma. Were you there Sir Knight?
I know anti-semitism when I hear and see it. And you sir, sound and look like it to me.
As with the other white knights, you bask in your relative anonymity. Who the hell are
Why not leave us an address to go with the name Sir Knight? Or are you just too
busy lighting up those crosses to care about who you demean and insult?
Let us know when you intend to be in Boston, so we can welcome you at the airport
in an appropriate manner. We won't be masked and you'll know us, no doubt, by the
horns coming out of our heads.
By the way, I think we have a couple of Jews on this listserve. I'm interested in
seeing what they have to say. And if my brash presumptions are so inappropriate
that I get tossed from this list, then the loss will be all yours.
4 Longfellow Place
Boston, MA 02114
"David Quinn" email@example.com
I saw a sort of "Table of Contents" of the Babylonian Talmud recently.
It was obvious that the US legal system is based on that same
It has nothing to do with the Mosaic Law in the Torah. Other than,
substantially, to contradict it.
I would caution against talking favorably about the "vision" behind
the US Constitution. Its vision was to encroach on the freedoms that
were enjoyed under the Articles of Confederation and, eventually, to
bring the people on this continent into subjugation.
PS How do Talmudists get to the top of the legal profession? It's
quite clear. In the legal business, it's very important which law
school one attends and how one does in the _first_ year. The second
and third years, believe it or not, are quite unimportant! (It's
also important that you were admitted to your law school with no
prior official legal training rather than transferring in as a
second or third year student!) This is like promoting a ballplayer to
the major leagues after three years in the minors, but based entirely
on his performance from way back in the first week in A ball. But
that's how it works. Hm I wonder why they do that??
Here's why, I think. One will do much better in the _first_ year of
law school if one has a similar background. A lot of law students say
law school is quite strange but after a while they get the hang of it.
But by then it's too late, they are identified as damaged goods. Who
will be able to hit the ground running when it really counts? Well, I
imagine that kids who grow up with the Talmudic legal system would fee
comfortable right away! Conversely, I've never seen any of the
self-help books on "how to survive law school" that looked like they
would do the trick. They might help you avoid flunking out, but they
wouldn't turn you into top-of-the-class material.
The legal system selects its "brethren" before unwanted outsiders have
a chance to learn the system. Yes they have elaborate safeguards on
the grading of exams in law school, coding them by number etc., but
they are lawyers after all and have a backup system!
Why do I know anything about law school? No I never considered going
to law school, wasting three years and a lot of money on something of
dubious worth. But in California one used to be able to take the bar
exam without law school. I was living in Arizona and I thought I
might try it out for fun -- if I passed I could become a lawyer in
California! So I browsed around in book stores and discovered I could
answer "practice" bar exam questions rather well. But then they
changed the rule in California ...