Our two remedies vs. the medical terror state across the U.S. is mandamus and habeas corpus.
I am using mandamus in Tennessee to end the whole CV-19 panic and illegal state of emergency. Mandamus works on the crisis as awhole.
Habeas corpus acts in favor of the individual. It is a “high prerogative writ of ancient origin in the common law” that can get you immediate liberty from a judge or magistrate if you are arrested illegally and taken down to the jail, or if you are already behind bars on a bogus charge of “not being vaccinated and not bearing your ‘freedom health card’” or “not wearing a mask in a public place” or “wilfully going shopping after the coronavirus curfew.”
If we keep in mind our remedies, the dark years ahead will be bearable, and those called the “free people” of Tennessee will eke out occasional victories against the state’s governors, lawyers, police, courts and white legal political establishment.
The lockdown in Tennessee that began March 12 with a travel ban April 2, 2020, is an overthrow of government by Gov. Bill Lee. His health security show is lawless, violating Tenn. Code Ann.§ 68-5-104, which violation is followed by a train of law-breaking and unconstitjtional acts. He effectively has placed all the citizens under arrest, and has placed them under quarantine, in an overthrow of the health law’s main concept.
I am using mandamus to reverse the state of emergency. It is a holistic counterattack going below ground to the root of the crisis. That is violation of the health provisions for epidemics and emergency.
An individual solution that operates in favor of the individual man or woman is a petition for writ of habeas corpus.
Defeating coming fraudulent restrictions
A group called Vaccination Credential Initiative is working on the idea of a vaccination passport without which people will not be able to get on buses, planes, trains, go into universities or public libraries, and be shunned. These might be people like you who are not “asymptomatic,” as our overlords see it, but actually “healthy.” Ahead is a despotic world of vaccinated people and those who refuse. The prospect of false arrest under the CV-19 global fraud is a real prospect, not just something in dystopian novels and movies.
A petition for habeas argues there is no jurisdiction for the officer and jail to hold you. There is power to hold you, might, muscle and threat to hold you. But no jurisdiction.
So you must be freed. Below is a link to a one-page document based on the sample petition for writ of habeas in the Tennessee Code Annotated § Title 29, chapter 20.
This sketch highlights how it works. I suggest you keep a copy among your papers and one in your jacket pocket for yourself. If you want to free another party from jail illegally held, you’ll have to draft an affidavit (needing a notary stamp and signature to validate), an extra step identifying for the judge the party in whose behalf you are acting.
Habeas corpus is latin for “you have the body.” According to Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th edition, “The name given to a variety of writs, (of which these were anciently the emphatic words,) having for their object to bring a party before a court or judge. In common usage, and whenever these words are used alone, they are understood to mean the habeas corpus ad sub jiciendum, (see infra.) Dancy v. Owens, 126 Okl. 37, 258 P. 879, 884; In re McDevitt, 101 Misc. 588, 168 N.Y.S. 433; U. S. v. Tod, 263 U.S. 149, 44 S.Ct. 54, 57, 68 L.Ed. 221; Payne v. Graham, 20 Ala.App. 439, 102 So. 729, 731. The sole function of the writ is to release from unlawful imprisonment. People ex rel. Luciano v. Murphy, 160 Misc. 573, 290 N.Y.S. 1011. The office of the writ is not to determine prisoner’s guilt or innocence, and only issue which it presents is whether prisoner is restrained of his liberty by due process. Ex parte Presnell, 58 Okl.Cr. 50, 49 P.2d 232.”
In Tennessee, habeas corpus can be obtained by “Any person imprisoned or restrained of liberty, under any pretense whatsoever, except in cases [of plea bargains, etc], may prosecute a writ of habeas corpus, to inquire into the cause of such imprisonment and restraint.”
The writ is issued to free the person after a hearing on the lawful authority that put him behind bars. Judges in criminal, circuit and chancery may issue the writ to liberate.
A judge who is aware of someone illicitly confined has a legal duty to issue a habeas on his behalf — otherwise it’s a misdemeanor if the judge doesn’t.
A wrongful and willful refusal to grant the writ, when properly applied for, is a misdemeanor in office, besides subjecting the judge to damages at the suit of the party aggrieved. § 29-21-108. Duty of court; wrongful refusal; fines and penalties
The judge has a duty to issue the writ, and free the person, if the person in jailed illegally or restrained in his liberty illegally.
Whenever any court or judge, authorized to grant this writ, has evidence, from a judicial proceeding, that any person within the jurisdiction of such court or officer is illegally imprisoned or restrained of liberty, it is the duty of such court or judge to issue, or cause to be issued, the writ as aforementioned, although no application be made therefor. § 29-21-104. Issuance; no application
If you are trying to get out an innocent person, a family member, or someone you know has been arrested in violation of law (without probable cause or a warrant), you are required to draft an affidavit about the identity of that person, giving as much information about the case as you know. A document notarized can serve as an affidavit, even if it doesn’t follow traditional form.
If the enemies of liberty cannot be kept away from us, we will have to deal with them as they ramp up their threats, bluff, lies and deceit. I already
We recognize that the writ of habeas corpus is a high prerogative writ of ancient origin in the common law, the vital purpose of which is to obtain immediate relief from illegal confinement; to liberate those who may be imprisoned without sufficient cause; and to deliver them from unlawful custody. It is essentially a writ of inquiry and is granted to test the right under which a person is detained, not to determine the guilt or innocence of a prisoner, but only to ascertain whether he is restrained of his liberty by due process of law.State ex rel. Brown v. Newell, 216 Tenn. 284, 290, 391 S.W.2d 667, 670 (1965)
A little bit more about habeas corpus is in this decision
Since only a void judgment may be attacked by the remedy of habeas corpus, the question presented is always one of jurisdiction, that is, whether the order, judgment or process under attack comes within the lawful authority of the court or judge rendering or issuing it. Henry v. Henkel, 235 U.S. 219, 35 S.Ct. 54, 59 L.Ed. 203 (1914); State ex rel. Holbrook v. Bomar, 211 Tenn. 243, 364 S.W.2d 887 (1963); Giles v. State ex rel. Giles, supra. As held by the Court of Appeals in this case, the writ does not lie to correct mere errors and irregularities committed by a court that is acting within its jurisdiction, that is, errors which fall short of depriving the court of jurisdiction. State ex rel. Holbrook v. Bomar, supra. Only those defects which are recognized as rendering absolutely void the proceedings whereby the petitioner is imprisoned may be reached by habeas corpus. State ex rel. Reed v. Heer, 218 Tenn. 338, 403 S.W.2d 310 (1966); State ex rel. Newsom v. Henderson, 221 Tenn. 24, 424 S.W.2d 186 (1968). The writ reaches jurisdictional error only; it is not available to serve the purpose of an appeal or writ of error. [emphasis added]
It must be noted, however, that not every violation of a constitutional provision or denial of a fundamental right during the course of a judicial proceeding constitutes grounds for habeas corpus; the error must be such as to render the whole proceeding void. Thus, if the right to due process of law is left unimpaired or the error alleged is not jurisdictional or is not prejudicial to the prisoner, there is no ground for habeas corpus although constitutional provisions may have been violated. See 39 C.J.S. Habeas Corpus s 37 (1976).State ex rel. Anglin v. Mitchell, 575 S.W.2d 284, 287, 288 (Tenn. 1979)
Come to think of it, habeas corpus can be used to free anyone jailed for “driving on revoked” or “driving on suspended,” as these alleged offenses require a warrant before arrest pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-7-103, arrest by officer without a warrant.
If you want to free another party, remember, the petition for the writ must be accompanied by your affidavit describing the situation.
Time to fight