Judicial

The only crimes are crimes of violence or threat of violence, property loss, and
fraud.

We believe that the so-called legislative police power, which was incorporated into the American justice system upon its formation, should be completely eliminated from American jurisprudence. The state should not have the power to define public necessity, public policy, the public interest or to make legislation related thereto.

The judicial process should be an earnest attempt – by due process of law – to extract reasonable restitution from a person convicted of a crime and to convey that restitution to the victim, to imprison or exclude criminals from society when necessary, to hold persons liable for damage they do, and to fairly settle contract disputes.

The failure of the government judicial system to apply these principles has led to the inability of its courts to administer justice and to the near collapse of public confidence in the American judicial system.

We support the concept that law should impose penalties proportional to the gravity of the violation of others’ rights, and prison sentences should be served in their entirety, unless the victim pardons the perpetrator. Unfortunately, the existing Three-Strikes-and-You’re-Out law fails to focus on the truly violent career criminals who are the greatest threat to their victims. Enhanced prison sentences and life imprisonment for multiple criminal acts should be reserved for
perpetrators of violent crimes. Prison space for these enhanced sentences should be made by pardoning those prisoners who were incarcerated for victimless “crimes”.

All persons should be equal before the law and entitled to due process of law. Due process should determine innocence or guilt in a manner designed to protect the individual rights of all persons concerned, both the accused and the accuser. We hold that individuals may settle their differences outside the court, if both so agree.

Until such time as persons are proven guilty of crimes, their individual rights shall be accorded full respect. We therefore advocate the following judicial reforms:

  1. The repeal of all civil asset forfeiture laws.
  2. Full protection of the rights of the accused, including complete access to all available records, information, or evidence (held by the courts or voluntarily submitted) to be used in the prosecution of the case.
  3. Full restitution of loss incurred by persons arrested, indicted, tried, imprisoned, or otherwise injured in the course of criminal proceedings against them which do not result in their conviction by the accuser, be it a law enforcement agency or private individual.
  4. The termination of all “preventive detention” procedures. No individual shall be detained or otherwise denied freedom of movement without formal charges being filed immediately following arrest.
  5. All jury trial findings shall be by unanimous decision, except that the parties to an action or proceeding may consent to a verdict by a majority of the panel.
  6. The abolition of the current practice of forced jury duty; we favor allvolunteer juries. In addition, we advocate that all juries in actions to which the government is a party shall be instructed that they have the right to judge not only the facts of the case, but also the justice of the law. Juries may hold all laws invalid that are, according to their conscience, unjust, and find no violation of such laws. Jurors, rather than the judge, should set the sentence for a guilty offender up to the maximum allowed by law.
  7. That no persons, other than government employees whose actions as an agent of the government have a direct bearing on the case at hand, be compelled to appear or testify before a grand jury, nor be denied independent legal counsel within the chambers of a grand jury proceeding. The issuance of “immunity from prosecution” by the court must not be used as an excuse to deny a person his or her constitutional rights.
  8. Recognition of the right of private parties to conduct, at their own expense, prosecutions against those they allege have victimized them. Public prosecutors should not have the authority to grant immunity from private prosecution to alleged perpetrators; thus we advocate an end to the practice of plea-bargaining without the consent of the victim.
  9. The repeal of all laws extending criminal or civil liability to producers or vendors whose products may be used by others in the commission of a crime or tort.
  10. The repeal of all laws establishing any category of crime applicable to a particular age group, including laws setting drinking ages and curfews, and an end to the practice of incarcerating children accused of no crime.
  11. The abolition of special penalties imposed for crimes committed against police officers or government employees.
  12. The repeal of all “hate crime” laws. It is not the proper function of government to punish criminals for their personal views and thoughts. We further oppose the introduction into courts of a person’s personal views as evidence.
  13. The trying of juveniles under the same procedures as adults. However, those convicted of violent crimes should be held by the California Youth Authority until age 18, then transferred to state prison for the remainder of their sentences.
  14. Child abuse cases should be considered criminal cases rather than administrative proceedings. Hence, in such cases, the accused is entitled to the presumption of innocence and protection against arbitrary governmental searches and seizures.
  15. That the serious crime of forcible rape should not be confused with cases of psychological pressure or persuasion if there was no threat of violence or other violation of rights. Nor should it be confused with cases in which an alleged victim was voluntarily under the influence of alcohol or other drugs, but was not incapacitated. “Psychological pressure or persuasion” shall not include threats of violence.
  16. Recognition of the right of any person convicted of a crime to seek restitution, in a separate legal action, for any violation of his or her rights.
  17. An end to the defenses of insanity or diminished capacity, and to the practice of pre-trial insanity hearings to determine capacity to stand trial.
  18. Recognition of the right of defendants and their counsel to inform jurors of the jury’s power to nullify any law, and of the possible sentences for each offense charged.
  19. In private lawsuits, the loser should pay the costs and litigation expenses of the prevailing party, at the discretion of the court.
  20. The abolition of the current practice of courts receiving a percentage of fines imposed.