From ~Jean: Common Law — What I have learned from reading, listening, and talking with some amazing people — to whom I am grateful :)

jean-1I share some thoughts below on the concept of a common law community, the great difference between the common law jury and the Grand Jury, which John Darash seems to feel are almost one-and-the-same, and draw a conclusion as to the effect John Daresh’s plans, if he goes forward with them, will have on our efforts to prosecute the criminals in our country. This has been the important factor from the start which involved me in this discussion. Finally, I share what Neil Keenan’s actions concerning this situation seem to tell us. . . ~J 

I have read a lot, listened to some great lectures and interviews, and talked on the phone with several very special people. I have been thinking and trying to make sense of what I am learning, and I thought I would try to write it out for you, my readers, to consider, and, of course, I know you will want to respond to me — for better or worse. 

Living under Common Law (and don’t go after me, please if I am using the wrong terminology here) is not what I thought it was. Common Law works best when a small group of people comes together as a community of sorts, agreeing to abide by the principles of Common Law. These people must each have gone through the formal process to exit our false matrix, the system under which we have unknowingly been enslaved.  I think the words ‘small community’ are very important. I had to learn that I I think we are not talking about a national organization.

Within this community, if a crime is committed, the common law jury, a group of peers in that community handles the situation.

If this country decides to return to life under Common Law, it looks to me like it needs to be a gradual process. If we were to take down the total governmental system right now, we would achieve nothing but chaos. It is the same situation, I think, as if at this time we were to destroy the entire banking system. We would suddenly find ourselves living in great turmoil. Any transition to Common Law – small groups of like-minded people —will likely be achieved more safely and with less stress over a long period of years.

(This reminds me of the story of the 40-years-in-the-desert. I think it was Nassim Haramein who suggested that was a symbolic period of time, but it was time needed for the people to forget their enslavement in Egypt. I think we will badly need that kind of time now on our planet for ourselves, and I think it will take generations.)

Because our education system doesn’t teach us about Common Law, those of us who want to make such a shift are going to have to take on the responsibility to go back to ‘school’and educate ourselves. Some will not want to do it, and so they will remain living in the matrix. No matter what people eventually decide, I suggest to everyone the wisdom of learning about it, how it operates, and so on. 

This kind of local Common Law Jury is not the sort of jury that NLA is seeking to establish. They are seeking to establish a Grand Jury, and that title without the mention of the words Common Law will suffice. If I understand it correctly, the Grand Jury is the fourth branch of our government as it was created by our founders. It was established for us the people so we could redress any grievances we had. This branch has been quietly swept under the carpet and out of sight by our slave masters.

The Grand Jury is the route through which we can address the criminals and the criminality in our Federal Government and country, in general, something I strongly believe if we are to maintain our humanity we must do peacefully. This is the only reason, right now, that I am personally interested in the discussion that has been going on for about six weeks. Apparently, there is serious study required to qualify to sit on this Grand Jury, because it is not about car accidents, or stealing something from a neighbor’s yard. Members should be selected very carefully. Also, we do not need dozens of these Grand Juries to try these criminals. Of course, there can be as many of these juries as people like, but for the purpose that interests me — it is not necessary.

The Grand Jury, although not connected directly with Common Law still requires that its members opt out of the established system, and establish what I have learned is called ‘standing.’ If NLA chooses to go ahead without establishing standing — and that is their right, and they are incorrect, then their Grand Jury members could be in serious trouble.

On my blog, through Eric Williams wonderful, crystal clear statements, I have done everything I possibly could to acquaint and inform people of the problems that I think the NLA is creating for itself, but I realize that is as far as my responsibility goes. 

Neil Keenan is beyond busy now in Jakarta — and we all need to send lots of light to that spot on the planet, but even so yesterday I received word from him saying he has told John Daresh he cannot support him. I suspect this is because I stamped my foot a bit, so that he finally found time to check out John’s efforts for himself and realized they are based on a false premise. (I simply couldn’t imagine that if he had the facts a stellar jurist like Dr. Aidun would involve himself.) I also suspect that Drake’s comment on his recent audio at minute 1:27.5:00 could have been referencing the help that Neil has subsequently withdrawn, and that when Drake shut my posts off his Facebook Page he was trying to stop me from becoming involved — maybe because I do my homework, I try to research things carefully, and because I totally support Neil Keenan’s efforts, I do try to have his back.

We are all adults, and we must learn to accept and live with the results of our decisions. 

My fear was that if these people go under, the entire Grand Jury idea would fall into confusion and chaos, exactly when we need it. My recent searching seems to indicate this would not be the case. All we need to do going forward is create a small number of grand juries to replace this structure. It should be quite simple, and I have already spoken to someone whose thoughts impress me and who is quietly working to do this, totally separate from NLA.  In other words, my fears that we would be caught short have been assuaged.

I have also talked to someone you all liked very much, who calls herself Debra, a retired policewoman and attorney who has lived that of which we are speaking. Her words resonate deeply with me, and she is willing to give us a lecture followed by a Q&A period, and this could happen perhaps by Thursday.

Debra is also willing to teach those who are interested in greater depth over a longer period of time, but it would not be on the internet. Her reasons for not doing it on the internet make complete sense to me, but I feel it is up to her to share them with you. Later today, I will speak with another individual who has also volunteered to join in on a conference call, someone who has been teaching Common Law for quite a while, and I will bring the information from that conversation to you if/when I am able.

Suddenly I see that anyone who is serious about moving into the new paradigm needs to learn something about Common Law, and I include myself in this group. Before this situation erupted, I had heard about Common Law, tried to read about it, but found I was not yet interested in it, so the words I read meant little or nothing to me. Since I now believe that this transition we are in appears that it is going to be a slow one — the drama of a quick shift would be far too much for most of humanity — I feel over a period of time we will all have the opportunity to study the subject of Common Law, and along with many of you, I am looking forward to becoming Common Law literate 🙂


This entry was posted in Financial/economic information, Health/Big Pharma/Insurance/Food Supply, Science and technology (including the connection between science and spirituality), Spiritual and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

36 Responses to From ~Jean: Common Law — What I have learned from reading, listening, and talking with some amazing people — to whom I am grateful :)

  1. Yvonne says:

    Jean, I am not from the US but I think you should be aware of this before this evening’s call and this section from it: “The cabal, of course, has created and promoted a tempting dead-end into which activists are even now being funneled: the ad hoc so-called Common Law courts which are springing up to impose a self-proclaimed unilateral “justice” on alleged violators ranging from both recent Popes to Queen Elizabeth and various heads of state. Common Law cannot supersede codified law in this way. It stands alongside and beneath codified law as its foundation. The actual mechanisms of justice in the world – corrupted and perverted by the oligarchy though they clearly are – will not be moved by proclamations of self-invented Common Law courts, or by “Citizens Tribunals.” The dubious legality of these self-made bodies is a fatal flaw, which deprives them of legitimacy, leaving potential allies in government, intelligence, finance, and military in an untenable position. The cabal knows this well, and so the disinformation agents and provocateurs are out in force among the Common Law enthusiasts, making absurd proclamations “disestablishing” the Catholic Church, and convicting world leaders with complete absence of due process, let alone legitimate jurisdiction or foundation in law.”

    • Jean says:

      I am aware of this and am also working on it. I expect it will come up tonight 🙂 Thanks so much for pointing out the operative paragraph 🙂 Hugs, ~Jean

    • Jean says:

      Yvonne, I took the time to vet this story with some reputable people, and I won’t be following it or discussing it . . . Thanks so much for the heads up. I was aware of the story because MHD had sent it to me, but I’ve been so busy I didn’t take the time to look into it. He’s been on this tack for a while, and I never could see that it made sense, but just in case, I decided to check . . Hugs, ~Jean

    • Nyceim says:

      Codified law (statues, acts, etc.) are rules which deal solely with the ens legis name (strawman, artificial entity, legal name, etc.) and are governed by corporations such as UNITED STATES CORP. Common law is for the living being. The sentient being who has a person and is not a person under codified laws. All people, as I understand it, are de -lived in corporate hospitals, given non disclosed registration contracts to sign and are made into corporations so to be afforded rights dictated by the corporation who is asking for citizenship. In order to rise above the perceived authority of codified laws, return to the living through a witnessed affidavit of fact whereas it clearly states you are alive. An unrefuted fact in law becomes evidence of truth. Until one returns to the living you are just another corpse-o-ration under codified law.

      The simplicity of common-law is this ‘Do not INTENTIONALLY cause harm to another or anothers property. No wo/man has the right to tell you your rights as long as you are not in violation of intent to cause harm. A jury is the most powerful group in both common and civil law but in civil law the judges refer to the 12 members as zombies/corpse-o-rations/ legal entities so tries to take a juries power away. Mention this in a jury trial and the judge needs to behave and respect the jury.

      • Nyceim says:

        I should also mention this. The true wealth of any nation is its labor. Regardless of what type of law, i.e. law of the land or law of water (Common vs Merchant law) there will always be problems associated with administering any law unless you design a society free from the shackles of the energy termed money. Labor when allowed to flow freely is the foundational principle of creativity and action.

        Anyone ever mentions to you that you need money, in order to motivate man, is a 3rd dimensional thinker, an entity in grade three so to speak. Grade three has no understanding of four and/or five. A third dimensional being navigates the sea of merchant law based on public opinion. Fourth and fifth dimensional understands third dimensional thinking but never the other way around.

        Everything you have ever dreamed of, times it by ten or more, once the idea of money is eradicated. No money, natural law prevails and all law exist unwritten in man.

  2. “… common law jury, a group of peers in that community handles the situation.” I think that one of the reasons the complex systems of “written” law in its many forms (Anglo-Saxon vs. Roman e.g.) were created is because the number of people in their respective communities exceeded the “Dunbar number” of about 150 for a group. Around that number of people a village can easily work along these principles, anywhere above that you will eventually feel a need for courts of appeal, then precedents, then written interpretation and finally you’ll arrive at the Pandects of the Romans.

  3. Eve says:

    Jean … Your words resonate. Common Law is something I have done small amounts of research on occasions over time never getting to the point of truly absorbing its depth but intrinsically knowing its importance. I think the energies are now galvanizing and its time has come. I am looking forward to hearing whomever you are able to bring forth with knowledge to spread this important part of our march to freedom. I am already sensing the fires being lit and transferred at lightning speed. Ideally we will need a sort of ” Common Law for Dummies ” 🙂 so that we may
    carry this forward and touch as many awakening souls as possible.

    • Jean says:

      Thank you, Eve, I’m really excited about the call for Thursday evening 🙂 More about that soon . . . Hugs, ~Jean

      • rat says:

        Jean, is there someone that can record that phone call and put it out there on your website for us to listen over and over instead of having 10,000 people have to call that phone number??? Like the Rod Class phone call, we can listen to it over and over. thanks and bless you for getting involved!!

  4. bornoutsidethebox says:

    Thank you for sharing this essential research with us. If it is truth, it is simple and we naturally understand from the core of our being. Your questioning is allowing the simple truth to arise from having been buried beneath the mountain of misdirecting ideas and words. You are greatly appreciated! Blessings. — Kathleen

  5. Bunte Bluemchen says:

    Dear Jean, it says that this page is not found. Kind Regards, Blue

  6. esskumar says:

    Jean, your point about small communities living under common law is very important. Small groups and large groups behave very differently: in small groups every individual matters while the statistics of large numbers enables prediction of the behavior of large groups and allows think tanks of the cabal to manipulate them. It is similar to the difference between ordinary solid matter and nano scale objects which have quantum behavior. In many old civilizations there are community courts or arbitration councils who mediate between disputes based on their traditional wisdom. It is important to realize that such courts do not always have the same ideas of justice and fair play that modern ethics accepts: there are horrible stories of honor killings of girls who marry outside their community and so forth. The important thing is that the unwritten law needs to be based on a system of ethics: a common view of what is good and what is not. That common understanding is a far more tricky affair than the points of law and procedure. You might recognize the truth of that in the six weeks of discussion on this blog.
    Your point about a gradual transition out of the matrix is even more important. While trying to tinker with the existing system, the danger is to be left with a broken down society: you can see what happens in Afghanistan, Iraq and so on. Perhaps we need to construct a “scaffolding” around the existing system, which allows us to carry out repairs safely, without damaging the edifice. It could be something like a system of “Watchful Democracy”. This would be based on three precepts:(1) Unlawful activities of individuals cannot enjoy the inadvertent protection of law by virtue of any device based on necessity of secrecy because such activities cannot, by definition, be part of official work of any lawful organization (2) There can be a category of offense such as “betrayal of trust” which would involve wrongful use of a position of authority in Public or Private institutions. This should have only one punishment: the person found guilty should lose all his property and money and be left with only basic means of subsistence. (3) The State, the Constitution, the Government, the Legislature, the Judiciary are creations of We, the People, who are Sovereign and hence can assert that Sovereign right by creating another “Whistle blower protection organization” which is separate from other creations and which should securely receive specific information and evidence about unlawful activities of individuals (both in Government and Private organizations) and make sure that sources of such information are protected physically as well as in terms of their livelihood and can in fact be rewarded in proportion to the size of penalties recovered. In particular, unlawful activities of judges, corporate executives and financiers can be exposed in detail WITHOUT ANY ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES. That is important. Then it would be difficult for the wrong doers to trust even their closest associates who may squeal on them for the windfall gains involved. There would be no safe quarter for such wrong doing even in their own workplaces.
    There are many small countries some existing like Iceland or in the offing like Scotland, Catalan, Quebec etc. Perhaps they can experiment with such ideas. There is also a possibility of “Digital democracy” in which every body participates in decision making: see Dr. Rosslyn Fuller article

  7. Damon says:

    It is so awesome to see the long time SPIRITUALLY AWARE – embrace FREEDOM.. It’s very difficult to bridge the GAP.. SPIRITUAL is often LEFT and FREE is often RIGHT and seldom do the two of them come together.. But Jean – you have done it!

    I am loosely affiliated with a Grand Jury in Oregon and another one in Washington – and from my perspective, John Daresh must be the main web guy, but when you get to the LOCAL level, all of the Jurors on BOTH Jury’s that I am affiliated with are embracing STATUS and STANDING.

    There is a method of updating your status, taking your papers to the Social Security Administration for filing, getting a certified copy and taking it to a Court and filing it and getting a copy of that filing and using that as your protection. I don’t know the intimate details, but that is an over simplified summary.. This task could be the magic trick that would have helped the OPPT/I-UV or Divine Province succeed.

  8. wokbee says:

    have you ever read the death of common sense by Philip k. Howard it would help understand common law a lot. and how we got to where we are at today you can get it on amazon. it help me may GOD BLESS US ALL IN OUR UNDERSTANDING stay calm

  9. Pingback: Now that we’re on their bloody, obscene trails, how do we bring them to justice? | Exopermaculture

  10. Jean says:

    I can’t say that it is . . . there is one moment at about 33:04, but I really can’t say . . . I do not know the other name you mention. . . and I am staying strong 🙂 thank you so much 🙂 Hugs, ~Jean

  11. Sacredpeaks says:

    Jean, Thank you so much for all you are doing to educate us on Common Law. I think bringing in Debra would be extremely valuable. Love and blessings to you!

  12. phil noble says:

    very simply put, Jean. Thanks!

  13. Tracy says:

    Me too Jean,
    I need/want to get common law literate; like you I just didn’t want to force myself to understand it; but now I feel I must get educated especially after doing some “foundation work” I feel it is important to understand it’s structure so one can “decide” if/how to exit the matrix and sit at the King/Queens table, and protect our family members. Common Law is a complete “shift” in how one lives one’s life. You have to make the commitment to be “self sufficient” – and if you can’t be 100% then you have to understand how to conduct yourself so that you are able to work within the “synthetic paper system”. I would be interested from any of the “experts” what books, videos, etc. one should read to assist them to understand the “paper system”. Further I would be interested how those who have exited the matrix, – how/what suggestions can they share to help others determine “self sufficiency models” and how to walk the line around the “paper system” when one is “fiscally/self sufficient”? Because there’s going to be some “integration overlap” working within/and outside the “fabricated paper system”. I hope that makes sense; Jean I look forward to more updates on this matter. Thank you for urging us forward and assisting us to better digest this “new paradigm” way of thinking/whether committing ourselves, or not.
    Great Blessings & Joy ❤ — Tracy

  14. Adriaan de Goede, France says:

    Thanks Jean. Yes we need to understand Common Law, and see clearly how we are tricked under Corporate Law now.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.