Have you ever contacted an Attorney to file claim against a Government entity who knowingly and purposefully violated your constitutional protected civil rights? And in your heart, you knew your rights were violated and you had strong evidence and witnesses to prove your case in court.
Subseqently it was related to you by these legal eagles, to either forget it or the cost would be absorbent with no guarantee of winning. Or, it was further related to discourage you in your pursuit of justice, that fighting City Hall is futile. With this in mind,knowing your strong conviction to receive restitution for the violations you suffered,You file a complaint for said violations within the Court system pursuant to law and your right under the U.S. Constitution (Pro-Se or on your own) only to hit a brick wall. Why? From the onset, once an individual contact the court system, informing them they are not an attorney or lawyer and wish to represent themselves, they encounter tremendous resistance. The complexity of the atmosphere change immediately, the resistance is pernicious and biased as race, ethnicity or sexual origin.
The chilling perception relayed to the individual of that most deeply offensive and insulting bromide so popular with lawyers “He who represents himself has a fool for a client”. This attitude delimits the jurisprudence of the justice system in which the U.S. Constitution was found and predicated. Said attitude is in direct contradiction of the Supreme Court ruling in Faretta v. California which specifically cites: “ Every citizen of the
The reasoning behind said decision correlates the Constitution which requires our justice system to be neutral towards the self represented litigant. Which in retrospect means the courts must offer a level playing field for the represented and the unrepresented alike consistent with basic principles of fairness, which are nonexistent.
The following problems self represented litigants are most likely to encounter within the court systems are: Procedural requirements, which are often perversely difficult such as: exorbitant filing fee’s, excessive copies, legal paper size, type of graphics or print to discourage the self represented litigant from pursuing their goal of justice. Court Clerks withhold information from non- lawyers that they routinely give freely to licensed Attorneys.
Many clerks offices feel compelled to post signs stating “ We don’t provide legal advice!” Which most often relate they are unwilling to render any assistance to the self represented to get into court or respond to a lawsuit .
There are a number of reasons why the courts and lawyers are equally biased against the self represented.
(1) Many people could pay a lawyer but choose not to. This choice repudiates lawyers with their special gifts and takes money out of their pockets. They believe it to be an insult to them for all their years of study and hard work, attending law school, to be on the same playing field with a novice, who is unfamiliar with court procedures that are set up by lawyers for lawyers, as non lawyers tend to get in the way of smooth court administration. .
(2) What is a Judge? A lawyer with a robe and title when not on the bench, who also is inclined or entitled to operate a private practice or firm in addition to their position as a Judge or Magistrate.
(3) Self represented individuals are a rebuke to the organized bar ‘s monopoly over legal services, because that monopoly is morally-if not legally- justified only if the legal profession is able to provide affordable justice for all.
For example, there's a law on the books in New Jersey backed by 300 yrs of history, which empowers the Grand Jury to conduct it’s own investigations in to complaints of wrong doing or corruption brought by ordinary citizens involving public officials . This law was enacted as a check and balances mechanism to protect the people from abuse by those placed in authority.
This right was rarely utilized and little known until recently discovered and challenged by an activist lawyer, who realized the injustice administered upon innocent individuals by corrupt officials needed to be addressed.
However the law was vigorously fought and won by the Attorney Generals and Prosecutors citing: “ It would open up a can of worms for abuse by citizens or anyone who receives an unfavorable decision, providing them with an avenue of retribution, regardless if said action was implemented against a judge, lawyer or the court.”
The New Jersey Supreme Court unanimously ruled only prosecutors, not private citizens can take complaints of wrong doing to a grand jury. Which in retrospect, delimits the jurisprudence of the justice system.
It’s a well known fact, sometimes the worst offenders charged with violating an individuals rights are those employed by public entities. They assume or believe, they are beyond retribution or immune from prosecution and have free reign to do what ever they please with sanctioned impunity. This pernicious and cavalier disposition, delivers the wrong message to the public, that they have no recourse but to accept the violations. Is this not what the United States Constitution and this country was founded on by our forefathers?
Was not their objective to rid this country of tyranny and oppression? The U.S. Constitution begins with this preamble : “ We the People of the United States in order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our prosperity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” Federal Statue 28 U.S.C. 1654 & 1343 specifically authorize each and every citizen of the
Presented by :
National/New
A Watch Dog Agency to Protect Your Rights
No comments:
Post a Comment