De Jure Grand Juries
DE Jure Grand Jury History
Jim’s Daily Rant. History of DE Jure Grand Jury and More Definitions.
By Jim Costa
DE Jure & DE Facto:
THELAW.COM LAW DICTIONARY & BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 2ND ED.
Latin for by right of law. Vide De facto. Of right; legitimate; lawful ; by right and just title. In this sense it is the contrary of de facto, (which see.) It may also be contrasted with de gratia, in which case it means “as a matter of right,” as de gratia means “by grace or favor.” Again it may be contrasted with de cequi tate; here meaning “by law,” as the latter means “by equity.” See Government. De jure declmaxam, originem dncens de jure patronatus, tunc cognitio spec tat at legem, civilem, i.e., commnnem. Godb. 63. With regard to the right of tithes, deducing its origin from the right of the patron, then the cognizance of them belongs to the civil law; that is, the common law.
Related Legal Terms & Definitions
Based on the definition above, a DE Jure Grand Jury is one that is by right, in contrast to a DE Facto jury, which is one not entirely legitimate or lawful, but is accepted and treated as if it were.
Let’s back into this analysis by first looking at De Facto Grand Juries. They are considered the Grand Juries we were raised with, being called by the government (State Attorney) on behalf of both the state.
A DE Jure Grand Jury is one given to us by right as by the Magna Carta:
Magna Carta Libertatum (Medieval Latin for "Great Charter of Freedoms"), commonly called Magna Carta (also Magna Charta; "Great Charter"),[a] is a royal charter of rights agreed to by King John of England at Runnymede, near Windsor, on 15 June 1215.[b] First drafted by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Cardinal Stephen Langton, to make peace between the unpopular king and a group of rebel barons, it promised the protection of church rights, protection for the barons from illegal imprisonment, access to swift justice, and limitations on feudal payments to the Crown, to be implemented through a council of 25 barons. Neither side stood behind their commitments, and the charter was annulled by Pope Innocent III, leading to the First Barons' War. Source
See Also First Baron’s War
The next word we need to learn is Sedition.
: incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority.
Merrian Webster Dictionary
1 : the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family
2: the betrayal of a trust : treachery
I am recreating my 2 week research of 15 years ago on this subject in just an hour today. In my opinion, historically, Sedition was saying bad things against the king. I studied a case in which, around the 1200 to 1400 time period, an English king was ill. Three doctors were summoned and all three consulted in the hallway after their exams. They agreed he would be dead in a few days but all agreed not to tell the king. They were afraid of losing their heads for treason.
There was no crime of sedition in the U. S. until WWI when it was created and used against those speaking out against the war. Until then it was only used to protect royalty.
In contrast. In 1649 English King Charles I was executed for Treason for dissolving Parliament. In this case, Treason was against the people, not the Crowned royalty. Source
It is my opinion that the Jan 1st trial and arrests is to make the people afraid of “sedition” against the politicians (unRoyal leaders).
It has been my opinion that we have had De Jure Grand Juries removed from our history for the same reason, to protect our unRoyal leaders, both Federal and state. So today De Facto Grand Juries are controlled by the “Crown” once again instead of the common folks who could convene a DE Jure Grand jury themselves, especially against the ruling class.
P.S. The reason there is no real methodology of convening a DE Jure Grand Jury is because everyone knew how to do it. It was simply done. This was just like searching for how to peel an egg article from 600 years ago. It was just known. So that’s why it’s not in the law books today.