Support Your Local
The following information is provided by Michigan
JAILer Rose Lear. For purposes of brevity and clarification, some portions may
be redacted and/or edited by comments. Every effort is made to remain true to
Your Local Judge
The two armed bandit
strikes again. Just as they started working second and third shift back in the
50's and 60's, now the state prisons are going to do the same. Prison Industries
are growing. [It took just over 200 years in
America to acquire the first one-millionth person placed
behind bars, but approximately only 15 years to double that
number. Having passed the two-millionth mark only recently, America
is continuing its expanse at an alarming rate. One of America's
greatest and most prosperous industries today is prison complexes, said to be
just behind that of General Motors which is now laying off. America's
incarceration level per capita far exceeds every communist and fascist
dictatorship around the globe by far. -j4j] We can expect to see
more convictions for petty crimes, misdemeanors and infractions.
01/05/06 AP. Idaho -
Senator suggests prison "hot cots." Senate President Pro Tem Robert Geddes says Idaho could
correct prison overcrowding by
requiring inmates to sleep in shifts.
The so-called "hot
cot" proposal would have two inmates
sharing the same bed at different times of the day. Geddes announced the proposal during the
Associated Press Legislative Preview
today. He says inmates could volunteer for the swing-shift life, and they would have a better shot at
scarce prison jobs because the
facilities would be operating around the clock.
What you will read below
doesn't just apply to Idaho and Michigan, it is happening in every state. I know
that here in Michigan, not only do the judges pad their retirement Funds, but so
also do the legislators. Why else would they keep making everything under the
sun against the law?
(1) Until October 1, 2003,
when fines and costs are assessed by a magistrate, a traffic bureau, or a judge
of the district court, not less than $9.00 shall be assessed as costs and
collected for each conviction or civil infraction determination and each guilty
plea or civil infraction admission except for parking violations. Of the costs
assessed and collected, for each conviction or civil infraction determination
and each guilty plea or civil infraction admission, $9.00 shall be paid to the
clerk of the district court.
(b) Beginning October 1,
2003, the clerk shall transmit $9.00 of any costs assessed before October 1,
2003 to the justice system fund created in section 181 of the revised judicature
act of 1961, 1961 PA 236, MCL 600.181.
600.181 Justice system
fund; creation; use; disposition; investment; distributions.
(1) .... The money in the
fund shall be used as provided in this section. ...
iv) To the secretary of
the legislative retirement system for deposit with the state treasurer in the
retirement fund created in the Michigan legislative
retirement system act, 1957 PA 261, MCL 38.1001 to 38.1080,
1.2% of the fund balance.
(vii) To the
state court fund created in section
151a, 14.3% of the fund balance.
(viii) To the
court equity fund created in section 151b, 25.55%
of the fund balance.
(c) Excess court
fees transmitted by the state treasurer pursuant to section 217 of
the judges' retirement act of 1992, Act No. 234 of the
Public Acts of 1992, being section 38.2217 of the Michigan Compiled
From the April, 2000 Idaho
your local judge -- it's the law
For almost anyone who has
been forced to defend himself (family, life, property, business, children,
freedom) from the position of a plaintiff or a defendant in a contemporary
court, judges can be a life form lower than attorneys. Why? Because judges come
to court with the gameboard set up so their actors can lie, cheat, steal and
purchase their way through the justice system.
There is no question among
those who have been in it, the court system, managed and policed by judges, is a
$multibillion litigation racket where justice is only served by accident. It is
of paramount irony that judges, the same ones who have been presiding all these
years and are responsible for the absolute, money-and-misery-making machine that
has become the legal system, are obligated by law to pad their retirement a
little softer with every civil action a citizen files in his court.
Following is the language
that is law concerning judges. Keep in mind that supreme court judges, as of
1998, make $90,791 per year with an annual 4 percent increase in pay; district
court judges make $85,095 per year with the same 4 percent annual increase in
pay that most of us cannot claim by law.
The potential for judges
to stack their retirement fund by forcing desperate people to file useless
actions in court is extreme and, considering the nature of some men to be
insatiably greedy, we can imagine that judges and their agents have learned how
to run their court in a manner most likely to produce the maximum of documents
which must be filed for a fee. Add the carrot of modern investment strategies
that have made $billions of (electronic) dollars for pools of investors, and you
have the most illustrative real-life example of the fox guarding the henhouse
that has ever been sanctioned by state statute.
COURTS AND COURT
JUDGES' RETIREMENT AND
1-2002. JUDGES' RETIREMENT
FUND. For the purpose of paying such retirement compensation, there is hereby
created in the office of the treasurer of the state of Idaho a fund to be known
as the "Judges' Retirement Fund," which shall consist of all moneys appropriated
from the general fund, and all moneys received from special fees to be paid by
parties to civil actions and proceedings, other than criminal, commenced in or
appealed to the several courts of the state, together with all contributions out
of the salaries and compensation of justices and judges, and interest received
from investment, and reinvestment, of moneys of the judges' retirement fund, all
as hereinafter provided.
All sums of money so
accrued and accruing to the judges' retirement fund, less an amount deemed
reasonable and necessary by the administrative director of the courts to pay for
necessary actuarial studies to assist in administering the judges' retirement
fund, are hereby appropriated to the payment of the annual retirement
compensation of such retired justices and judges, and to payment of the
allowances to surviving spouses.
COURTS AND COURT
JUDGES' RETIREMENT AND
1-2003. ADDITIONAL FEES IN
CIVIL ACTIONS AND APPEALS.
(a) In addition to the
fees and charges to be collected by the clerks of the district courts of the
state and by other persons authorized by rule or administrative order of the
Supreme Court as now or hereafter provided by law, such clerks and authorized
persons are directed to charge and collect the additional sum of eighteen
dollars ($18.00) for filing a civil case or proceeding of any type in the
district court or magistrate's division of the district court including cases
involving the administration of decedents' estates, whether testate or
intestate, conservatorships of the person or of the estate or both and
guardianships of the person or of the estate or both, except that no fee shall
be charged or collected for filing a proceeding under the Summary Administration
of Small Estates Act. The additional sum of eighteen dollars ($18.00) shall also
be collected from any party, except the plaintiff, making an appearance in any
civil action in the district court, but such eighteen dollars ($18.00) fee shall
not be collected from the person making an appearance in civil actions filed in
the small claims departments of the district court.
(b) The sum of eighteen
dollars ($18.00) shall also be collected:
(1) from an intervenor in
(2) from a party who files
a third party claim;
(3) from a party who files
a cross claim;
(4) from a party appealing
from the magistrate's division of the district court to the district
(5) from a party appealing
the decision of any commission, board or body to the district
(c) The clerk of the
Supreme Court is authorized and directed to charge and collect, in addition to
the fees now prescribed by law and as a part of the cost of filing the
transcript on appeal in any civil case or proceeding, other than criminal,
appealed to the Supreme Court, the additional sum of eighteen dollars ($18.00);
for filing a petition for rehearing, the additional sum of ten dollars ($10.00);
for filing an application for any writ for which a fee is now prescribed, the
additional sum of ten dollars ($10.00); for filing appeals from the industrial
accident board, the additional sum of five dollars ($5.00).
(d) The clerks of the
district courts, persons authorized by rule or administrative order of the
Supreme Court and the clerk of the Supreme Court are directed and required to
remit all additional charges and fees authorized by this section and collected
during a calendar month, to the state treasurer within five (5) days after the
end of the month in which such fees were collected. The state treasurer shall
place all such sums in the judges' retirement fund.
COURTS AND COURT
JUDGES' RETIREMENT AND
1-2008. INVESTMENT OF
JUDGES' RETIREMENT FUND. The investment board shall at the direction of the
supreme court select and contract with a minimum of one (1) investment manager
to manage the investment of the judges' retirement fund. The investment
manager(s) shall, subject to the direction of the board, exert control over the
funds as though the investment manager(s) were the owner thereof, subject to the
limitation hereinafter provided. The investment manager(s) is hereby authorized
to invest the judges' retirement fund in the following manner and in the
following investments or securities ....
(5) Corporate obligations
designated as corporate convertible debt securities.
(6) Obligations secured by
mortgages constituting a first lien upon real property of the state of Idaho
which are fully insured or guaranteed as to the payment of the principal by the
government of the United States or any agency thereof.
(7) Time certificates of
deposit and savings accounts.
(8) Common or preferred
stocks of corporations.
(9) Commercial paper,
which at the time of purchase, is rated prime 1 by Moody's Investors Service
incorporated or is rated A-1 or higher by Standard and Poor's corporation.
As we can plainly see, our
legislature has provided the judicial branch of government with laws that allow
them to prosecute for profit, the most obvious conflict of interest imaginable:
Judges are allowed to run their courts as a vehicle to generate revenue that
allows them to pad their own retirements.
The more appeals the
public is forced to file because lower court rulings were compromised in one way
or another, the more money appears in the account. The worse judges are, the
better their retirement.
One last point: Judges'
private retirement fund from publicly-generated revenues is overflowing with
money and being used to make more money through modern investment strategies
while your public retirement from privately-generated revenue has been spent by
the people we elected to draft, approve, and implement this entire retirement
MICHIGAN JUDGES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM •
Stocks Market Value
Microsoft Corporation $4,137,766
Citigroup Incorporated 4,075,380
General Electric Corporation 3,909,508
Pfizer Incorporated 3,842,305
Wal-Mart Stores Incorporated 3,322,819
Exxon Mobil Corporation 2,975,971
Wells Fargo & Company 2,057,776
Bank of America Corporation 2,046,585
Intel Corporation 2,046,369
Federal National Mortgage Association
Largest Stock Holdings (By Market Value)*
September 30, 2003
(Concluding remarks by Ron Branson):
It becomes obvious from the above statistics
illustrative of the courts around the nation, that the courts and judges of
America are the beneficiaries of huge legacies at the expense of the People. It
should be noted that Constitutionally all appropriate fines imposed by
a court for specified violations must have a reasonable connection to the
damages incurred by the government for the said violation. In other words,
the sentence must fit the crime. However, imposing fines that raises
revenue for a legislative or judicial retirement fund is unconstitutional,
because all revenue-raising ventures must be apportioned equally. In other
words, everyone benefting from the venture must reasonably pay an equal amount.
The test then is to ask one's self whether the
retirement of judges is a measure to be borne by the community at large, or by
fining violators of a code. If the venture is one of
revenue-raising for the retirement of judges, then it is unconstitutional
because it is not uniform, and a burden shared by all. If it is a legitimate
fine, it must be limited to damages reasonably caused by the violation, and
You are each encouraged to investigate what percentage
of your fines is going toward the support of judges in your state. You are
welcome to report your findings to Rose Lear, firstname.lastname@example.org, who is
researching this project.
Obviously, J.A.I.L. will weigh in on these alleged
violations and the constitutional question involved in a fine