As I prepare for my lawsuits against NOSY NEIGHBOR AND THE GANG illegal black market pornography -----this is the court structure my cases will travel through to some extent.
I must consider COURT JURISDICTION in filing COMPLAINT of sexual predator illegal surveillance and knowing my local police and court structures are fast approaching inaccessibility due to bills being passed by Baltimore City Maryland Assembly pols and failure of our Maryland Attorney and Baltimore City Attorney to protect our pathways to justice-----I will work toward moving to another jurisdiction due to extreme bias against this case----if it is not accepted for GRAND JURY REVIEW.
We see below GRAND JURY is as old as COMMON LAW/AGE OF ENLIGHTENMENT/MAGNA CARTA. It is the #1 route all 99% WE THE PEOPLE black, white, and brown have for justice from CRIMINAL actions that harm.
The Grand Jury can be said to have "celebrated" its 800th birthday in 2015, because a precursor to the Grand Jury is defined in Article 61, the longest of the 63 articles of Magna Carta, also called Magna Carta Libertatum (Latin: "the Great Charter of Liberties") executed on 15 June 1215 by King John and by the Barons.
Below, is a comment board that indicates how hard it would be to get an IMPARTIAL, RANDOM SELECTED jury pool for these GRAND JURY structures. The time a prospective jurist must spend on these cases has led to CITIZENS working hard to get OUT OF JURY DUTY, opening the door to hand-picked jury selection. It takes only the planting of a couple of hand-picked jurists to make sure particular criminal cases will not make it through GRAND JURY.
Our average JOES AND JANES-----are likely those not able to commit to these court structures.
A JURY OF PEERS-----PASSING JUDGEMENT.
Baltimore City Grand Jury
Has anyone ever been called for Baltimore City Grand Jury?
Asking for a friend (really!). Apparently, it's a four month stint, 40 hours a week. You can only get out of it by citing severe financial hardship. Wouldn't that apply to almost anyone? I think that your employer has to keep your job, but they don't have to pay you. Not too many people could go for four months without a paycheck, and only $15/day from the city.
Thoughts and comments?
ACLU accuses Anne Arundel prosecutor, police of abusing grand jury process The ACLU of Maryland is accusing Anne Arundel County State’s Attorney Wes Adams and the Annapolis Police Department of abusing the grand jury process to obtain lists of Annapolis public housing residents after the housing authority director ceased providing them ...
Grand Jury Handbook
Your service as a
grand juror is important
to all of the citizens
of Maryland.
It is an
obligation and a
responsibility which
ensures equal treatment
under the law for all.
**********************************************************
Here is the problem for my case as I work towards private and class action lawsuits. Not only has Baltimore and Maryland passed laws making it harder or impossible for ACTUAL EQUAL ACCESS to justice, but our MARYLAND BAR of lawyers tend to be grounded in the DARK AGES having no structure that allows those required EQUAL ACCESS to justice structures. So, our Baltimore City Attorney's Office and our Maryland Attorney General's Office which should be that PROSECUTOR will not be allowing my case to hit GRAND JURY.
I shared last week how our Maryland Attorney General FROSH has stood against any SEXUAL HARASSMENT/SEXUAL ASSAULT lawsuits especially when they are aimed at INSTITUTIONS being held accountable for protecting the public and employees.
So, I will struggle with both attaining that PROSECUTOR in taking my case to GRAND JURY and with who will be chosen to sit on that GRAND JURY -----it only takes a few SELECTED jurors to STOP this lawsuit.
Maryland Federal Grand Jury
The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution requires that you be indicted before a grand jury before you can be charged with an “infamous” or capital crime. This amendment has been interpreted to require an indictment before you are charged with any federal felony crime, unless you waive your right to indictment. While a state prosecutor does not always have to convene a grand jury before charging you with a crime, a U.S. attorney does have to go through this process before you can be put on trial for any federal felony offense. If you are the subject of a federal investigation, or you are arrested for a federal crime, you need to consult with a Maryland federal lawyer about the process and what your legal options are.
How Does a Federal Grand Jury Work?
Rule 6 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure establishes the requirements for grand jury proceedings. A federal grand jury is made up of between 16 and 23 jurors. These jury members meet periodically, and when a U.S. Attorney wants to bring charges for a federal crime, the federal prosecutor must book time with the grand jury. At least 16 jurors must be present for the grand jury to convene, and a foreperson and a deputy foreperson must be appointed when a grand jury is impaneled.
The federal prosecutor will present evidence to a grand jury of the crime that was allegedly committed. The proceedings are less formal than a typical court trial and are kept 100 percent confidential in order to allow witnesses to speak freely and to protect the reputation of a defendant who is not indicted.
Typical rules of evidence don’t apply in a grand jury proceeding. Grand juries can subpoena physical evidence, such as videotapes, relevant e-mails and other documents, and guns or weapons allegedly used in the commission of a crime. Witnesses may also be subpoenaed to testify before the grand jury. DEA agents, FBI agents, and other federal investigators or law enforcement officers frequently testify before a grand jury, as do eyewitnesses. Witnesses are not allowed to bring an attorney into the grand jury room but can have a federal lawyer present in the hallway whom they can confer with.
Typically, only a prosecutor is present at a grand jury proceeding and the grand jury proceedings are even kept secret from the defendant. A defendant whom the grand jury was convened to indict may sometimes have the opportunity to testify but is not required to do so. If a defendant testifies at a grand jury proceeding, the defense attorney is not allowed to ask questions. The prosecutor can interrogate the defendant, and the grand jury can submit questions for the prosecutor to ask.
Legal instructions are read to the jurors at the end of the proceedings, and the jury can vote to indict or not. The decision to indict does not need to be unanimous; only 12 jurors must vote to indict. If the jury chooses to indict, the indictment is called a “true bill.”
What Does the Federal Grand Jury Process Mean for You?
The federal grand jury process can have a huge impact on your life, because an indictment means that a federal case against you can proceed to criminal trial. Unfortunately, you have little actual ability to influence the outcome of the grand jury proceedings, since only a prosecutor can present evidence, and you may not know what information is presented during grand jury proceedings.
*****************************************************************
This article was written by a citizen of Baltimore who may not have same political leanings I do but we both support this GRAND JURY issue. This shows how our Baltimore City Maryland Assembly pols---far-right wing, global banking 5% freemason/Greek player pols ------have been MOVING FORWARD laws to DISMANTLE this EQUAL ACCESS FOR ALL to GRAND JURY-------we say the goals of global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS is to eliminate even MAGNA CARTA----but the goal in short term seeks to end AGE OF ENLIGHTENMENT---I AM MAN COMMON LAW------tied to guaranteed access to GRAND JURY for redressing CRIMINAL harm against us.
These are of course the same BALTIMORE POLITICAL MACHINES that I shout out against ---and who like to let me know they are busy being SEXUAL PREDATORS---watching illegal streaming video taken all around Baltimore and including my living space.
POLITICAL MACHINES IN BALTIMORE AND BLACK MARKET ILLEGAL SURVEILLANCE AND PORNOGRAPHY RACKETEERING-----
So, how will I get this case to GRAND JURY------EXTREME BIAS is legal standing for CHANGE OF JURISDICTION whether in US courts or if case is taken to INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT.
This article does a good job outlining how GRAND JURY should work----how Baltimore and Maryland passed laws to make sure it DOES NOT WORK------and even Maryland has legal precendence to assuring 99% of WE THE CITIZENS OF MARYLAND will access this GRAND JURY.
'The Court opinioned that:
“It is the opinion of this Court that every citizen has a right to offer to the grand jury violations of the criminal law. This does not mean that an individual member of that body may be approached. The citizen should exhaust his remedy before the magistrate and the State’s Attorney, as was done in the instant case, and if relief cannot be had there, he then has the right to ask the foreman of the grand jury for permission to appear before that body.”'
Baltimore's politicians just keep voting statute into place which is illegal and unconstitutional and can and will be VOIDED.
I am being told by police ---WHY DON'T YOU GO TO 'PEOPLE'S COURT'-----for crimes against humanity sexual predatory RICO RACKETEERING case tied to black market pornography and illegal surveillance.
What is the grand Jury?
How we lost access to it and what it means to everyone
The grand jury has been described as the greatest instrument of freedom known to our form of government and as a bulwark against oppression. It is the last effective tool that the citizen has to hold their government officials accountable for corrupt actions undertaken in the performance of their duties.
"The grand jury is an accusing body, and not a judicial tribunal; and it acts upon knowledge possessed by its members from any source, whether from witnesses brought before it, or from information gained before its sessions. `In this state they have plenary inquisitorial powers, and may lawfully themselves, and upon their own motion, originate charges against offenders, though no preliminary proceedings have been had before a magistrate, and though neither the court nor the state's attorney has laid the matter before them.' Blaney v. State, 74 Md. 153, 21 A. 547, 548; In re Grand Jury Report, 152 Md. 616, 137 A. 370. And their oath requires them to present all things truly as they come to their knowledge, according to the best of their understanding." Id. at 566.
What happened to Baltimore?
The Maryland General Assembly has perpetrated a fraud on the people of Baltimore City by denying us access to the grand jury. Senate Bill 374, introduced by Senator Lisa Gladden in 2011, has effectively been the tool that they use to accomplish this illegal scheme and it is a law that passed without opposition from any other representative in the State. When the State's Atorney refuses to bring charges against corrupt officials and the City Police Department won't do their job and arrest violators of the law, where else can the people turn? Not to the grand jury anymore.
Who controls it?
In Maryland, the State's Attorney has full discretion over the cases that are presented to the grand jury but that does not mean that is the last word on it. As aforementioned, the People can bring charges to the grand jury by simply knocking on the door and requesting the foreperson for permission to present a matter before the entire panel.
How?
Senate Bill 374 (2011) in the General Assembly eliminated access to the grand jury in just Baltimore City. A provision in the law, for Baltimore City only, had one addtional requirement of the grand jury. That was to do an investigation that no other jurisdiction required them to do, a separate investigation into anything the judge wanted them to. Our lawmakers used that to ban our total access and the courts are gladly helping them.
What is the court's role in it?
The grand jury meets in the courthouse and the administrative judge for the circuit court is responsible for providing security for the members of the panel. This is not just for their safety but to prevent them from being unduly influenced or threatened relating to their deliberations and not returning indictments, as they should. For this reason, you must be authorized to be in the part of the building where the grand jury meets. If not, you will be arrested for trespassing. In order to knock on the door and request the foreperson of the grand jury for permission to present your complaint, you have to gain that access from a judge. Due to the change in the law, the Baltimore City Circuit Court is using it to deny all access to the grand jury. Not only do you have to request permission to access the grand jury, you have to inform the judge of the reason why you need to approach them. Of course, your request will be denied if it alleges any criminal violations of the law that are committed by public officials. This allows their corruption to continue without any oversight at all. This lack of oversight only empowers officials to commit more corrupt acts.
In the wake of so many instances wherein City officials have demonstrated a deliberate indifference to resolving issues that have resulted in people suffering grievous losses of property and lives due to their actions, the right to approach the grand jury is of great importance. As the State’s Attorney has discretion over whether or not the office wants to present those charges to the grand jury on behalf of the State, it is not the last word on the matter. Brack v. Wells has been consistently upheld by the Court of Appeals and as retired Chief Judge Bell for that Court recently reaffirmed, “It is the opinion of this Court that every citizen has a right to offer to the grand jury violations of the criminal law. This does not mean that an individual member of that body may be approached. The citizen should exhaust his remedy before the magistrate and the State’s Attorney…and if relief cannot be had there, he then has the right to ask the foreman of the grand jury for permission to appear before that body.” With this law as it stands today, a judge has now been put in place to be a further obstacle to gaining that access now.
I, along with two other individuals, previously requested permission of the Administrative Judge for the Circuit Court, the Honorable Marcella Holland, for authorization to approach the Grand Jury with allegations relating to corrupt acts committed by our elected and appointed officials, in an attempt to commence an investigation into those charges. That request was submitted on September 20, 2013. Judge Holland retired without taking any action on the request. A second request for authorization was requested of the Hon. Judge W. Michel Pierson, the current Circuit Administrative Judge for the Baltimore City Circuit Court. As of this date, no authorization has been received regarding this request. I have been waiting for approximately 2 years for this authorization.
My complaint deals with criminal violations of Maryland law and as the Court has ruled in Brack v. Wells 184 Md. 86 (1944), that Maryland citizens have the common law right to approach a grand jury to make complaints, this law seems clear, straightforward, and is sufficiently detailed. The Court opinioned that:
“It is the opinion of this Court that every citizen has a right to offer to the grand jury violations of the criminal law. This does not mean that an individual member of that body may be approached. The citizen should exhaust his remedy before the magistrate and the State’s Attorney, as was done in the instant case, and if relief cannot be had there, he then has the right to ask the foreman of the grand jury for permission to appear before that body.”
I have exhausted the remedies, as provided for in the aforementioned cited case. On June 25, 2013, I submitted a complaint to a Court Commissioner who informed me that the complaint would be forwarded to the State’s Attorney. The Commissioner did not indicate whether or not he found that probable cause existed and I was told that he was deferring that question to the State’s Attorney for a determination. As of this date, I have received no correspondence from the State’s Attorney on the matter. I have received a certified mail receipt indicating that the Office of the State’s Attorney had received my request for a status update. I can only assume that because that office did not respond to my request for an update, as to whether or not the State’s Attorney’s Office was going to file the appropriate charges against the defendants, they do not intend to file them.
I am aware that the secrecy of the grand jury process is strictly adhered to and, as well it should appropriately be. In Coblentz v. State, 164 Md. 558, 166 A. 45 (1933), the issue arose because of the presence in the grand jury room of an unauthorized person, an attorney who represented certain plaintiffs in civil litigation against the banking institution of which the defendant was president. The president was accused of accepting a deposit when the institution was, to his knowledge, insolvent. It was pointed out that although then Code (1924) Art. 10, § 27 permitted a circuit court to appoint an attorney to take the place of a State's attorney when necessary because of absence, sickness, resignation or death of the State's attorney, that "section [could] not be involved in the [Coblentz] case, because there was no absence, death, or disability of the state's attorney regularly serving, and it [did] not fit the description of the order passed." It goes without saying that the presence of an unauthorized person in the grand jury room could betray the secrecy of the proceeding. In the course of the opinion Chief Judge Bond made certain observations for the Court relative to the functions of the grand jury:
Sheriff John Anderson
Captain Ruebottom
Captain Hughes
Judge W. Michel Pierson
Judge Timothy Doory
The action presented by Senate Bill 374 sought to eliminate a provision in the law for Baltimore City because they had one addtional requirement of the grand jury and that was to do an investigation that no other jurisdiction required them to do and that was to perform a separate investigation into anything the judge wanted them to. In 2011, the grand jury investigated the bias in the media. Click here for a link to the report.
How we lost access to it and what it means to everyone
The grand jury has been described as the greatest instrument of freedom known to our form of government and as a bulwark against oppression. It is the last effective tool that the citizen has to hold their government officials accountable for corrupt actions undertaken in the performance of their duties.
"The grand jury is an accusing body, and not a judicial tribunal; and it acts upon knowledge possessed by its members from any source, whether from witnesses brought before it, or from information gained before its sessions. `In this state they have plenary inquisitorial powers, and may lawfully themselves, and upon their own motion, originate charges against offenders, though no preliminary proceedings have been had before a magistrate, and though neither the court nor the state's attorney has laid the matter before them.' Blaney v. State, 74 Md. 153, 21 A. 547, 548; In re Grand Jury Report, 152 Md. 616, 137 A. 370. And their oath requires them to present all things truly as they come to their knowledge, according to the best of their understanding." Id. at 566.
The Maryland General Assembly has perpetrated a fraud on the people of Baltimore City by denying us access to the grand jury. Senate Bill 374, introduced by Senator Lisa Gladden in 2011, has effectively been the tool that they use to accomplish this illegal scheme and it is a law that passed without opposition from any other representative in the State. When the State's Atorney refuses to bring charges against corrupt officials and the City Police Department won't do their job and arrest violators of the law, where else can the people turn? Not to the grand jury anymore.
In Maryland, the State's Attorney has full discretion over the cases that are presented to the grand jury but that does not mean that is the last word on it. As aforementioned, the People can bring charges to the grand jury by simply knocking on the door and requesting the foreperson for permission to present a matter before the entire panel.
Senate Bill 374 (2011) in the General Assembly eliminated access to the grand jury in just Baltimore City. A provision in the law, for Baltimore City only, had one addtional requirement of the grand jury. That was to do an investigation that no other jurisdiction required them to do, a separate investigation into anything the judge wanted them to. Our lawmakers used that to ban our total access and the courts are gladly helping them.
It is my intent to uphold the integrity of the grand jury process. In furtherance of that, it is my belief that the delays demonstrated by officers of the Circuit Court in failing to authorize requests in a timely manner, is tantamount to obstruction of justice.
The grand jury meets in the courthouse and the administrative judge for the circuit court is responsible for providing security for the members of the panel. This is not just for their safety but to prevent them from being unduly influenced or threatened relating to their deliberations and not returning indictments, as they should. For this reason, you must be authorized to be in the part of the building where the grand jury meets. If not, you will be arrested for trespassing. In order to knock on the door and request the foreperson of the grand jury for permission to present your complaint, you have to gain that access from a judge. Due to the change in the law, the Baltimore City Circuit Court is using it to deny all access to the grand jury. Not only do you have to request permission to access the grand jury, you have to inform the judge of the reason why you need to approach them. Of course, your request will be denied if it alleges any criminal violations of the law that are committed by public officials. This allows their corruption to continue without any oversight at all. This lack of oversight only empowers officials to commit more corrupt acts.
Zirkin, Bobby A. (Chair)
Kelley, Delores G. (Vice Chair)
Brochin, James
Cassilly, Robert
Hough, Michael J.
Lee, Susan C.
Muse, C. Anthony
Norman, Wayne
Ramirez, Victor R.
Ready, Justin
Smith, William C., Jr.
Frosh, Brian. (Chair)
Gladden, Lisa. (Vice Chair)
Brochin, James
Forehand, J
Getty, J.
Jacobs, Nancy
Ramirez, Victor R.
Raskin
Shank, C.
Stone, Norman
Zrikin, Bobby A.
2018
Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee
2011
House Judiciary Committee
2011
2018
Vallario, Joseph F., Jr. (Chair)
Dumais, Kathleen M. (Vice Chair)
Anderson, Curt
Atterbeary, Vanessa E.
Cluster, Joe
Conaway, Frank M., Jr.
Corderman, Paul
Gibson, Angela C.
Glass, Glen
Kittleman, Trent
Lewis, Jazz
Malone, Michael E.
McComas, Susan K.
Moon, David
Morhaim, Dan K.
Parrott, Neil
Proctor, Susie
Queen, Pam
Rey, Deborah C.
Sanchez, Carlo
Sydnor, Charles E., III
Vallario, Joseph F., Jr. (Chair) [DID NOT VOTE]
Dumais, Kathleen M. (Vice Chair)
Alston, T.
Anderson, Curt
Arora
Carter, Jill (Appt BC Office of Civil Rights)
Clippinger
Cluster, Joe
Conaway, Frank M., Jr.
Dwyer [EXCUSED]
Hough, M
Kelly, K.
Lee, Susan
McComas, Susan.
McDermott
Mitchell, K.
Parrott, Neil
Simmons, L.
Smigiel, Mike
Valderama
Waldstreicer
[Voted in favor of Senate Bill 374 in 2011]
[Voted in favor of Senate Bill 374 in 2011]
_______________________________________
I already anticipate the inability to seek justice through my local GRAND JURY because I cannot even get POLICE DEPARTMENT to acknowledge any crimes of illegal hacking capture producing images of illegal surveillance and pornography---instead all pathways have made it impossible for me to achieve a SAFE APARTMENT AND BUILDING filled with WELL-BEING.
I will be educating and seeking court legal standings and precedence which will take me out of this local jurisdiction looking at both US Federal court and International Criminal Court.
Using one venue to possibly push another-------MAYBE.
What is Court Jurisdiction?
When a suit is filed in a particular court, it must be determined whether that court has authority to hear the case. Usually, this authority is granted by statute, constitution, or a political leader in the country in which the court sits. A court may only adjudicate cases if it has authorization to do so. The term "court jurisdiction" refers to the power of a court to oversee a certain case and to issue any rulings or orders associated with the case.
Deciding whether a court has been empowered to hear a case often involves analyzing whether it has personal or subject matter jurisdiction. Personal, or personam, court jurisdiction is present when a court has authority to adjudicate a case involving certain people or entities. It’s often established when a plaintiff or defendant has a significant connection to the court territory. Connections may include living in or doing business in the territory as well as engaging in a transaction or being part of a controversy that occurred within the territory.
When a court has been empowered to hear the particular type of issue at hand, subject matter jurisdiction exists. For instance, a family law court may be authorized to oversee proceedings relating to child custody, divorce, child support payments, and the like. If a prosecutor tried to bring a criminal court trial before a family law judge, subject matter jurisdiction may not exist. The criminal case would probably need to be brought in front of a criminal court with power to render a decision in the case. It’s possible for two or more courts to have court jurisdiction in one case, a phenomenon known as concurrent jurisdiction.
Court jurisdiction can also be divided into appellate and original jurisdiction. Appellate jurisdiction is granted to superior courts that are set up for the purpose of correcting errors made in lower courts. Their review is generally limited to examining cases for mistakes made by lower courts.
On the other hand, courts with original jurisdiction have been given the power to hear the case in the first place. These courts are often categorized as either general or special courts. A special court has been given authority to hear specific kinds of cases. For instance, a tax court may be designated to hear tax issues and a bankruptcy court may be delegated authority to hear bankruptcy issues. A court with general jurisdiction is a trial court that has been empowered to hear any type of case that isn’t reserved for a special court.
_____________________________________
I like this article because it indicates a history of victims of SEXUAL ASSAULTS having easier access to GRAND JURY.
6 of your questions about grand juries, answered
12/05/14 05:21 PM--Updated 12/05/14 06:52 PM
When and why does a case go to a grand jury?
When a felony is committed, here is what can happen:
1. Without an arrest (when you do not physically have the perpetrator or know who he or she is) evidence can be presented to a grand jury. The indictment is called a “no arrest indictment,” which forms the basis of an arrest warrant, so when the suspect is found and arrested he or she has already been indicted.
2. After a person is arrested, the case is immediately – within a week, unless time is waived – presented to a grand jury.
3. After a person is arrested, he or she is not held in jail because the district attorney is investigating and unsure whether the case will be presented to a grand jury, or reduced to a misdemeanor, and a plea offer may be made thereby waiving a grand jury, or the case will be dismissed.
4. There is no arrest, you know who the perpetrator is and the case is presented to a grand jury. An arrest only occurs if a grand jury indicts.
In the cases of Ferguson and Staten Island, both went to a grand jury because that is standard practice when a case involves a police officer. It’s not the law, just the practice. What is commonly said is that “no one would ever be a police officer if it was otherwise.” I believe these cases went to a grand jury because the accused was a police officer, had qualified immunity and the incident occurred while the police officer was on duty.
What are the requirements for a grand jury to decide to indict someone?
The only requirement is that probable cause exists to support criminal charges against the accused person. In essence, the grand juror must feel there is enough evidence against the person to proceed to trial. It is a very low standard. You could have one witness, a victim, come in and testify without any corroborating physical evidence and get an indictment. That is rare but it does occur in some cases of sexual assault with victims who don’t approach authorities until many years after an incident.
I must consider COURT JURISDICTION in filing COMPLAINT of sexual predator illegal surveillance and knowing my local police and court structures are fast approaching inaccessibility due to bills being passed by Baltimore City Maryland Assembly pols and failure of our Maryland Attorney and Baltimore City Attorney to protect our pathways to justice-----I will work toward moving to another jurisdiction due to extreme bias against this case----if it is not accepted for GRAND JURY REVIEW.
We see below GRAND JURY is as old as COMMON LAW/AGE OF ENLIGHTENMENT/MAGNA CARTA. It is the #1 route all 99% WE THE PEOPLE black, white, and brown have for justice from CRIMINAL actions that harm.
The Grand Jury can be said to have "celebrated" its 800th birthday in 2015, because a precursor to the Grand Jury is defined in Article 61, the longest of the 63 articles of Magna Carta, also called Magna Carta Libertatum (Latin: "the Great Charter of Liberties") executed on 15 June 1215 by King John and by the Barons.
Below, is a comment board that indicates how hard it would be to get an IMPARTIAL, RANDOM SELECTED jury pool for these GRAND JURY structures. The time a prospective jurist must spend on these cases has led to CITIZENS working hard to get OUT OF JURY DUTY, opening the door to hand-picked jury selection. It takes only the planting of a couple of hand-picked jurists to make sure particular criminal cases will not make it through GRAND JURY.
Our average JOES AND JANES-----are likely those not able to commit to these court structures.
A JURY OF PEERS-----PASSING JUDGEMENT.
Baltimore City Grand Jury
Has anyone ever been called for Baltimore City Grand Jury?
Asking for a friend (really!). Apparently, it's a four month stint, 40 hours a week. You can only get out of it by citing severe financial hardship. Wouldn't that apply to almost anyone? I think that your employer has to keep your job, but they don't have to pay you. Not too many people could go for four months without a paycheck, and only $15/day from the city.
Thoughts and comments?
ACLU accuses Anne Arundel prosecutor, police of abusing grand jury process The ACLU of Maryland is accusing Anne Arundel County State’s Attorney Wes Adams and the Annapolis Police Department of abusing the grand jury process to obtain lists of Annapolis public housing residents after the housing authority director ceased providing them ...
Grand Jury Handbook
Your service as a
grand juror is important
to all of the citizens
of Maryland.
It is an
obligation and a
responsibility which
ensures equal treatment
under the law for all.
**********************************************************
Here is the problem for my case as I work towards private and class action lawsuits. Not only has Baltimore and Maryland passed laws making it harder or impossible for ACTUAL EQUAL ACCESS to justice, but our MARYLAND BAR of lawyers tend to be grounded in the DARK AGES having no structure that allows those required EQUAL ACCESS to justice structures. So, our Baltimore City Attorney's Office and our Maryland Attorney General's Office which should be that PROSECUTOR will not be allowing my case to hit GRAND JURY.
I shared last week how our Maryland Attorney General FROSH has stood against any SEXUAL HARASSMENT/SEXUAL ASSAULT lawsuits especially when they are aimed at INSTITUTIONS being held accountable for protecting the public and employees.
So, I will struggle with both attaining that PROSECUTOR in taking my case to GRAND JURY and with who will be chosen to sit on that GRAND JURY -----it only takes a few SELECTED jurors to STOP this lawsuit.
Maryland Federal Grand Jury
The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution requires that you be indicted before a grand jury before you can be charged with an “infamous” or capital crime. This amendment has been interpreted to require an indictment before you are charged with any federal felony crime, unless you waive your right to indictment. While a state prosecutor does not always have to convene a grand jury before charging you with a crime, a U.S. attorney does have to go through this process before you can be put on trial for any federal felony offense. If you are the subject of a federal investigation, or you are arrested for a federal crime, you need to consult with a Maryland federal lawyer about the process and what your legal options are.
How Does a Federal Grand Jury Work?
Rule 6 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure establishes the requirements for grand jury proceedings. A federal grand jury is made up of between 16 and 23 jurors. These jury members meet periodically, and when a U.S. Attorney wants to bring charges for a federal crime, the federal prosecutor must book time with the grand jury. At least 16 jurors must be present for the grand jury to convene, and a foreperson and a deputy foreperson must be appointed when a grand jury is impaneled.
The federal prosecutor will present evidence to a grand jury of the crime that was allegedly committed. The proceedings are less formal than a typical court trial and are kept 100 percent confidential in order to allow witnesses to speak freely and to protect the reputation of a defendant who is not indicted.
Typical rules of evidence don’t apply in a grand jury proceeding. Grand juries can subpoena physical evidence, such as videotapes, relevant e-mails and other documents, and guns or weapons allegedly used in the commission of a crime. Witnesses may also be subpoenaed to testify before the grand jury. DEA agents, FBI agents, and other federal investigators or law enforcement officers frequently testify before a grand jury, as do eyewitnesses. Witnesses are not allowed to bring an attorney into the grand jury room but can have a federal lawyer present in the hallway whom they can confer with.
Typically, only a prosecutor is present at a grand jury proceeding and the grand jury proceedings are even kept secret from the defendant. A defendant whom the grand jury was convened to indict may sometimes have the opportunity to testify but is not required to do so. If a defendant testifies at a grand jury proceeding, the defense attorney is not allowed to ask questions. The prosecutor can interrogate the defendant, and the grand jury can submit questions for the prosecutor to ask.
Legal instructions are read to the jurors at the end of the proceedings, and the jury can vote to indict or not. The decision to indict does not need to be unanimous; only 12 jurors must vote to indict. If the jury chooses to indict, the indictment is called a “true bill.”
What Does the Federal Grand Jury Process Mean for You?
The federal grand jury process can have a huge impact on your life, because an indictment means that a federal case against you can proceed to criminal trial. Unfortunately, you have little actual ability to influence the outcome of the grand jury proceedings, since only a prosecutor can present evidence, and you may not know what information is presented during grand jury proceedings.
*****************************************************************
This article was written by a citizen of Baltimore who may not have same political leanings I do but we both support this GRAND JURY issue. This shows how our Baltimore City Maryland Assembly pols---far-right wing, global banking 5% freemason/Greek player pols ------have been MOVING FORWARD laws to DISMANTLE this EQUAL ACCESS FOR ALL to GRAND JURY-------we say the goals of global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS is to eliminate even MAGNA CARTA----but the goal in short term seeks to end AGE OF ENLIGHTENMENT---I AM MAN COMMON LAW------tied to guaranteed access to GRAND JURY for redressing CRIMINAL harm against us.
These are of course the same BALTIMORE POLITICAL MACHINES that I shout out against ---and who like to let me know they are busy being SEXUAL PREDATORS---watching illegal streaming video taken all around Baltimore and including my living space.
POLITICAL MACHINES IN BALTIMORE AND BLACK MARKET ILLEGAL SURVEILLANCE AND PORNOGRAPHY RACKETEERING-----
So, how will I get this case to GRAND JURY------EXTREME BIAS is legal standing for CHANGE OF JURISDICTION whether in US courts or if case is taken to INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT.
This article does a good job outlining how GRAND JURY should work----how Baltimore and Maryland passed laws to make sure it DOES NOT WORK------and even Maryland has legal precendence to assuring 99% of WE THE CITIZENS OF MARYLAND will access this GRAND JURY.
'The Court opinioned that:
“It is the opinion of this Court that every citizen has a right to offer to the grand jury violations of the criminal law. This does not mean that an individual member of that body may be approached. The citizen should exhaust his remedy before the magistrate and the State’s Attorney, as was done in the instant case, and if relief cannot be had there, he then has the right to ask the foreman of the grand jury for permission to appear before that body.”'
Baltimore's politicians just keep voting statute into place which is illegal and unconstitutional and can and will be VOIDED.
I am being told by police ---WHY DON'T YOU GO TO 'PEOPLE'S COURT'-----for crimes against humanity sexual predatory RICO RACKETEERING case tied to black market pornography and illegal surveillance.
What is the grand Jury?
How we lost access to it and what it means to everyone
The grand jury has been described as the greatest instrument of freedom known to our form of government and as a bulwark against oppression. It is the last effective tool that the citizen has to hold their government officials accountable for corrupt actions undertaken in the performance of their duties.
"The grand jury is an accusing body, and not a judicial tribunal; and it acts upon knowledge possessed by its members from any source, whether from witnesses brought before it, or from information gained before its sessions. `In this state they have plenary inquisitorial powers, and may lawfully themselves, and upon their own motion, originate charges against offenders, though no preliminary proceedings have been had before a magistrate, and though neither the court nor the state's attorney has laid the matter before them.' Blaney v. State, 74 Md. 153, 21 A. 547, 548; In re Grand Jury Report, 152 Md. 616, 137 A. 370. And their oath requires them to present all things truly as they come to their knowledge, according to the best of their understanding." Id. at 566.
What happened to Baltimore?
The Maryland General Assembly has perpetrated a fraud on the people of Baltimore City by denying us access to the grand jury. Senate Bill 374, introduced by Senator Lisa Gladden in 2011, has effectively been the tool that they use to accomplish this illegal scheme and it is a law that passed without opposition from any other representative in the State. When the State's Atorney refuses to bring charges against corrupt officials and the City Police Department won't do their job and arrest violators of the law, where else can the people turn? Not to the grand jury anymore.
Who controls it?
In Maryland, the State's Attorney has full discretion over the cases that are presented to the grand jury but that does not mean that is the last word on it. As aforementioned, the People can bring charges to the grand jury by simply knocking on the door and requesting the foreperson for permission to present a matter before the entire panel.
How?
Senate Bill 374 (2011) in the General Assembly eliminated access to the grand jury in just Baltimore City. A provision in the law, for Baltimore City only, had one addtional requirement of the grand jury. That was to do an investigation that no other jurisdiction required them to do, a separate investigation into anything the judge wanted them to. Our lawmakers used that to ban our total access and the courts are gladly helping them.
What is the court's role in it?
The grand jury meets in the courthouse and the administrative judge for the circuit court is responsible for providing security for the members of the panel. This is not just for their safety but to prevent them from being unduly influenced or threatened relating to their deliberations and not returning indictments, as they should. For this reason, you must be authorized to be in the part of the building where the grand jury meets. If not, you will be arrested for trespassing. In order to knock on the door and request the foreperson of the grand jury for permission to present your complaint, you have to gain that access from a judge. Due to the change in the law, the Baltimore City Circuit Court is using it to deny all access to the grand jury. Not only do you have to request permission to access the grand jury, you have to inform the judge of the reason why you need to approach them. Of course, your request will be denied if it alleges any criminal violations of the law that are committed by public officials. This allows their corruption to continue without any oversight at all. This lack of oversight only empowers officials to commit more corrupt acts.
In the wake of so many instances wherein City officials have demonstrated a deliberate indifference to resolving issues that have resulted in people suffering grievous losses of property and lives due to their actions, the right to approach the grand jury is of great importance. As the State’s Attorney has discretion over whether or not the office wants to present those charges to the grand jury on behalf of the State, it is not the last word on the matter. Brack v. Wells has been consistently upheld by the Court of Appeals and as retired Chief Judge Bell for that Court recently reaffirmed, “It is the opinion of this Court that every citizen has a right to offer to the grand jury violations of the criminal law. This does not mean that an individual member of that body may be approached. The citizen should exhaust his remedy before the magistrate and the State’s Attorney…and if relief cannot be had there, he then has the right to ask the foreman of the grand jury for permission to appear before that body.” With this law as it stands today, a judge has now been put in place to be a further obstacle to gaining that access now.
I, along with two other individuals, previously requested permission of the Administrative Judge for the Circuit Court, the Honorable Marcella Holland, for authorization to approach the Grand Jury with allegations relating to corrupt acts committed by our elected and appointed officials, in an attempt to commence an investigation into those charges. That request was submitted on September 20, 2013. Judge Holland retired without taking any action on the request. A second request for authorization was requested of the Hon. Judge W. Michel Pierson, the current Circuit Administrative Judge for the Baltimore City Circuit Court. As of this date, no authorization has been received regarding this request. I have been waiting for approximately 2 years for this authorization.
My complaint deals with criminal violations of Maryland law and as the Court has ruled in Brack v. Wells 184 Md. 86 (1944), that Maryland citizens have the common law right to approach a grand jury to make complaints, this law seems clear, straightforward, and is sufficiently detailed. The Court opinioned that:
“It is the opinion of this Court that every citizen has a right to offer to the grand jury violations of the criminal law. This does not mean that an individual member of that body may be approached. The citizen should exhaust his remedy before the magistrate and the State’s Attorney, as was done in the instant case, and if relief cannot be had there, he then has the right to ask the foreman of the grand jury for permission to appear before that body.”
I have exhausted the remedies, as provided for in the aforementioned cited case. On June 25, 2013, I submitted a complaint to a Court Commissioner who informed me that the complaint would be forwarded to the State’s Attorney. The Commissioner did not indicate whether or not he found that probable cause existed and I was told that he was deferring that question to the State’s Attorney for a determination. As of this date, I have received no correspondence from the State’s Attorney on the matter. I have received a certified mail receipt indicating that the Office of the State’s Attorney had received my request for a status update. I can only assume that because that office did not respond to my request for an update, as to whether or not the State’s Attorney’s Office was going to file the appropriate charges against the defendants, they do not intend to file them.
I am aware that the secrecy of the grand jury process is strictly adhered to and, as well it should appropriately be. In Coblentz v. State, 164 Md. 558, 166 A. 45 (1933), the issue arose because of the presence in the grand jury room of an unauthorized person, an attorney who represented certain plaintiffs in civil litigation against the banking institution of which the defendant was president. The president was accused of accepting a deposit when the institution was, to his knowledge, insolvent. It was pointed out that although then Code (1924) Art. 10, § 27 permitted a circuit court to appoint an attorney to take the place of a State's attorney when necessary because of absence, sickness, resignation or death of the State's attorney, that "section [could] not be involved in the [Coblentz] case, because there was no absence, death, or disability of the state's attorney regularly serving, and it [did] not fit the description of the order passed." It goes without saying that the presence of an unauthorized person in the grand jury room could betray the secrecy of the proceeding. In the course of the opinion Chief Judge Bond made certain observations for the Court relative to the functions of the grand jury:
Sheriff John Anderson
Captain Ruebottom
Captain Hughes
Judge W. Michel Pierson
Judge Timothy Doory
The action presented by Senate Bill 374 sought to eliminate a provision in the law for Baltimore City because they had one addtional requirement of the grand jury and that was to do an investigation that no other jurisdiction required them to do and that was to perform a separate investigation into anything the judge wanted them to. In 2011, the grand jury investigated the bias in the media. Click here for a link to the report.
How we lost access to it and what it means to everyone
The grand jury has been described as the greatest instrument of freedom known to our form of government and as a bulwark against oppression. It is the last effective tool that the citizen has to hold their government officials accountable for corrupt actions undertaken in the performance of their duties.
"The grand jury is an accusing body, and not a judicial tribunal; and it acts upon knowledge possessed by its members from any source, whether from witnesses brought before it, or from information gained before its sessions. `In this state they have plenary inquisitorial powers, and may lawfully themselves, and upon their own motion, originate charges against offenders, though no preliminary proceedings have been had before a magistrate, and though neither the court nor the state's attorney has laid the matter before them.' Blaney v. State, 74 Md. 153, 21 A. 547, 548; In re Grand Jury Report, 152 Md. 616, 137 A. 370. And their oath requires them to present all things truly as they come to their knowledge, according to the best of their understanding." Id. at 566.
The Maryland General Assembly has perpetrated a fraud on the people of Baltimore City by denying us access to the grand jury. Senate Bill 374, introduced by Senator Lisa Gladden in 2011, has effectively been the tool that they use to accomplish this illegal scheme and it is a law that passed without opposition from any other representative in the State. When the State's Atorney refuses to bring charges against corrupt officials and the City Police Department won't do their job and arrest violators of the law, where else can the people turn? Not to the grand jury anymore.
In Maryland, the State's Attorney has full discretion over the cases that are presented to the grand jury but that does not mean that is the last word on it. As aforementioned, the People can bring charges to the grand jury by simply knocking on the door and requesting the foreperson for permission to present a matter before the entire panel.
Senate Bill 374 (2011) in the General Assembly eliminated access to the grand jury in just Baltimore City. A provision in the law, for Baltimore City only, had one addtional requirement of the grand jury. That was to do an investigation that no other jurisdiction required them to do, a separate investigation into anything the judge wanted them to. Our lawmakers used that to ban our total access and the courts are gladly helping them.
It is my intent to uphold the integrity of the grand jury process. In furtherance of that, it is my belief that the delays demonstrated by officers of the Circuit Court in failing to authorize requests in a timely manner, is tantamount to obstruction of justice.
The grand jury meets in the courthouse and the administrative judge for the circuit court is responsible for providing security for the members of the panel. This is not just for their safety but to prevent them from being unduly influenced or threatened relating to their deliberations and not returning indictments, as they should. For this reason, you must be authorized to be in the part of the building where the grand jury meets. If not, you will be arrested for trespassing. In order to knock on the door and request the foreperson of the grand jury for permission to present your complaint, you have to gain that access from a judge. Due to the change in the law, the Baltimore City Circuit Court is using it to deny all access to the grand jury. Not only do you have to request permission to access the grand jury, you have to inform the judge of the reason why you need to approach them. Of course, your request will be denied if it alleges any criminal violations of the law that are committed by public officials. This allows their corruption to continue without any oversight at all. This lack of oversight only empowers officials to commit more corrupt acts.
Zirkin, Bobby A. (Chair)
Kelley, Delores G. (Vice Chair)
Brochin, James
Cassilly, Robert
Hough, Michael J.
Lee, Susan C.
Muse, C. Anthony
Norman, Wayne
Ramirez, Victor R.
Ready, Justin
Smith, William C., Jr.
Frosh, Brian. (Chair)
Gladden, Lisa. (Vice Chair)
Brochin, James
Forehand, J
Getty, J.
Jacobs, Nancy
Ramirez, Victor R.
Raskin
Shank, C.
Stone, Norman
Zrikin, Bobby A.
2018
Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee
2011
House Judiciary Committee
2011
2018
Vallario, Joseph F., Jr. (Chair)
Dumais, Kathleen M. (Vice Chair)
Anderson, Curt
Atterbeary, Vanessa E.
Cluster, Joe
Conaway, Frank M., Jr.
Corderman, Paul
Gibson, Angela C.
Glass, Glen
Kittleman, Trent
Lewis, Jazz
Malone, Michael E.
McComas, Susan K.
Moon, David
Morhaim, Dan K.
Parrott, Neil
Proctor, Susie
Queen, Pam
Rey, Deborah C.
Sanchez, Carlo
Sydnor, Charles E., III
Vallario, Joseph F., Jr. (Chair) [DID NOT VOTE]
Dumais, Kathleen M. (Vice Chair)
Alston, T.
Anderson, Curt
Arora
Carter, Jill (Appt BC Office of Civil Rights)
Clippinger
Cluster, Joe
Conaway, Frank M., Jr.
Dwyer [EXCUSED]
Hough, M
Kelly, K.
Lee, Susan
McComas, Susan.
McDermott
Mitchell, K.
Parrott, Neil
Simmons, L.
Smigiel, Mike
Valderama
Waldstreicer
[Voted in favor of Senate Bill 374 in 2011]
[Voted in favor of Senate Bill 374 in 2011]
_______________________________________
I already anticipate the inability to seek justice through my local GRAND JURY because I cannot even get POLICE DEPARTMENT to acknowledge any crimes of illegal hacking capture producing images of illegal surveillance and pornography---instead all pathways have made it impossible for me to achieve a SAFE APARTMENT AND BUILDING filled with WELL-BEING.
I will be educating and seeking court legal standings and precedence which will take me out of this local jurisdiction looking at both US Federal court and International Criminal Court.
Using one venue to possibly push another-------MAYBE.
What is Court Jurisdiction?
When a suit is filed in a particular court, it must be determined whether that court has authority to hear the case. Usually, this authority is granted by statute, constitution, or a political leader in the country in which the court sits. A court may only adjudicate cases if it has authorization to do so. The term "court jurisdiction" refers to the power of a court to oversee a certain case and to issue any rulings or orders associated with the case.
Deciding whether a court has been empowered to hear a case often involves analyzing whether it has personal or subject matter jurisdiction. Personal, or personam, court jurisdiction is present when a court has authority to adjudicate a case involving certain people or entities. It’s often established when a plaintiff or defendant has a significant connection to the court territory. Connections may include living in or doing business in the territory as well as engaging in a transaction or being part of a controversy that occurred within the territory.
When a court has been empowered to hear the particular type of issue at hand, subject matter jurisdiction exists. For instance, a family law court may be authorized to oversee proceedings relating to child custody, divorce, child support payments, and the like. If a prosecutor tried to bring a criminal court trial before a family law judge, subject matter jurisdiction may not exist. The criminal case would probably need to be brought in front of a criminal court with power to render a decision in the case. It’s possible for two or more courts to have court jurisdiction in one case, a phenomenon known as concurrent jurisdiction.
Court jurisdiction can also be divided into appellate and original jurisdiction. Appellate jurisdiction is granted to superior courts that are set up for the purpose of correcting errors made in lower courts. Their review is generally limited to examining cases for mistakes made by lower courts.
On the other hand, courts with original jurisdiction have been given the power to hear the case in the first place. These courts are often categorized as either general or special courts. A special court has been given authority to hear specific kinds of cases. For instance, a tax court may be designated to hear tax issues and a bankruptcy court may be delegated authority to hear bankruptcy issues. A court with general jurisdiction is a trial court that has been empowered to hear any type of case that isn’t reserved for a special court.
_____________________________________
I like this article because it indicates a history of victims of SEXUAL ASSAULTS having easier access to GRAND JURY.
6 of your questions about grand juries, answered
12/05/14 05:21 PM--Updated 12/05/14 06:52 PM
When and why does a case go to a grand jury?
When a felony is committed, here is what can happen:
1. Without an arrest (when you do not physically have the perpetrator or know who he or she is) evidence can be presented to a grand jury. The indictment is called a “no arrest indictment,” which forms the basis of an arrest warrant, so when the suspect is found and arrested he or she has already been indicted.
2. After a person is arrested, the case is immediately – within a week, unless time is waived – presented to a grand jury.
3. After a person is arrested, he or she is not held in jail because the district attorney is investigating and unsure whether the case will be presented to a grand jury, or reduced to a misdemeanor, and a plea offer may be made thereby waiving a grand jury, or the case will be dismissed.
4. There is no arrest, you know who the perpetrator is and the case is presented to a grand jury. An arrest only occurs if a grand jury indicts.
In the cases of Ferguson and Staten Island, both went to a grand jury because that is standard practice when a case involves a police officer. It’s not the law, just the practice. What is commonly said is that “no one would ever be a police officer if it was otherwise.” I believe these cases went to a grand jury because the accused was a police officer, had qualified immunity and the incident occurred while the police officer was on duty.
What are the requirements for a grand jury to decide to indict someone?
The only requirement is that probable cause exists to support criminal charges against the accused person. In essence, the grand juror must feel there is enough evidence against the person to proceed to trial. It is a very low standard. You could have one witness, a victim, come in and testify without any corroborating physical evidence and get an indictment. That is rare but it does occur in some cases of sexual assault with victims who don’t approach authorities until many years after an incident.
RSS Feed
