Related posts:
Prosecution of nonviolent Gray girl, 14, cover for 2 wrongs by cop
Jackson invites city court judge to get TAN, open case to sunshine of freedom
DAs control grand jury with 99% indictment rate, no probes of public corruption
Gay ‘gunshot in mouth’ would open Scout marketplace to local brands
All-American Taxi’s crisis tells about regulator’s coercive ‘good’
Local vote affects city future; national vote shares in delusions
‘Rule of Law Radio’ listener should replicate police powers notice in home state
Courts deaf to complaints about cop raids, executions, ‘welfare checks’ gone bad
Parker asserts right of communication, liberty under organic law
Hammond defends probe into East Ridge police execution of plumber
City boosts ‘Minority Report’ surveillance powers 400%
HUD rule enables U.S. to enslave cities to its will
McLemore treated as n----r in patdown, search at shoe store
Judges meet secretly as U.S. jurist assured they're not rulemaking, eyeing bills
Melvin relates story of police abuse, courage in standing up for rights
There is an ancient maxim of the law that states ignorantia juris non excusat, or “ignorance of the law does not excuse.” Put another way, it is presumed that the public knows the laws, and a defense of ignorance is typically not allowed. So, if the public in general is presumed to know the law, even if they have never even actually seen and read it, then how is it possible for those empowered by we the people to serve within the executive and judicial departments of government in order to apply and enforce the laws to ever be able to claim ignorance as the basis for their getting an interpretation, application, or ruling on any given law completely wrong in any or every possible way or completely in spite of it?…
by Eddie Craig