The State of New Hampshire (The Freedom state. No seat belt laws for adults and they have fewer fatality rate per 100 million vehicle miles than seat belts Iowa does), now has a "Jury Rights Law" which allows the defense to tell the jury they have the constitutional right to "put the law and charges on trail," as well as the defendant.

A juror doesn't have to convict anyone of anything, if such juror(s) believe its an improper law, even though they know the defendant is guilty of some "'nanny or possession law," they can just simply vote "not guilty" and nullify the charges and the law.

Jurors have always had that right, but they're ignorant of it and are lead to believe they must deed the defendant to the lions to satisfy some over-zealous prosecution program.

Prosecutors shudder at the thought of a jury that knows their full constitutional rights. They want intimidated puppets.

For more information on this, go to Find out something you're not suppose to know.

Nowadays, some non-violent people are in prison only because they possessed something the power hungry zealots don't want them to have, even though they didn't and didn't intend to harm anyone or anything else.

There are officials in high places that know how to cleverly neuter the Constitution and trample on citizens rights in their effort to accomplish some great goal.

They also have a different dictionary that neuters the true meaning of words.

Jurors should disregard such official B.S. and go with the true Constitution and dictionary.

A man in New Hampshire was prosecuted for cultivating marijuana on  his own property for his own use only.

A jury of constitutionally-minded jurors knew he was guilty as charged, but voted "not guilty" and nullified the charges. They knew this is still America not the old Soviet Union.

We have unconstitutional laws and practices going on because our lawmakers cater to big money/big business, professional lobbyists and power-hungry officials who will trample on citizens' constitutional rights in their drive to accomplish some great goal.

The highest purpose of a jury is not to "just feed the defendant to the lions to satisfy some over-zealous prosecution program," but rather "to protect fellow citizens from tyrannical prosecutions."

Jurors are not in it to score "conviction points or to be politically correct."

Herman Lenz,

Sumner, IA


Load comments