Post Number
This Post's ID Number Is= 5901
- Remember the Post ID Number.
- Enter the post number and it will be find.
ID System
See Post ID System For List Of Posts
Transcipt
#68, Jury Manipulation pt 1
Disclaimer: The Justice and Legal Segment on the Consider Podcast is only concerned with calling all individuals to repentance. No matter which side of the bar one is on. The demand is for repentance in accordance with Amos 5:24. Let justice roll on like a river, righteousness like a never-failing stream. Nothing discussed should be considered legal advice. Want legal advice, pay a lawyer. Want justice? Pray to the Holy God. As the living God recorded in Deuteronomy 16:20, all must follow justice and justice alone. The listener assumes all responsibility for their actions or refusal to act accordance with justice and justice alone. Because the legal system hides their corrupt deeds and darkness any discussion is fraud with inadequate information. The listener should keep in mind that the news media only communicates what sells. Finally, make note that the vast majority of what is called legal, is in fact, not lawful. The Consider Podcast examining today’s wisdom madness and folly. www.consider.info
Timothy: Let us consider a little deeper the Dog and Pony Show known as Jury Duty.
Intro: Welcome to the Consider Podcast where the whole Gospel message is used to examine today’s wisdom, folly and madness. Acts 5:20, “Go stand and speak to the people in the temple the whole message of this life.” Join the hosts Timothy and Jacob, as they pick up their cross to follow Jesus as we pray that God enlightens the mind according to verse 25 of Ecclesiastes chapter 7. So, I turn my mind to understand to investigate to search out wisdom and the scheme of things and to understand the stupidity of wickedness and the madness of folly. (Ecclesiastes 7:25). The Consider Podcast, examining today’s wisdom, folly, and madness with the whole gospel. www.consider.info.
Timothy: How’s it going, Jacob?
Jacob: It’s going good.
Timothy: What’s your favorite snack food? Your like all-time top comfort snack food that’s probably not good for you snack food.
Jacob: Snack food or just like dessert?
Timothy: I’ll take your pick. We’re not on court testimony type level yet.
Jacob: Classic chocolate chip cookies. I’ll go for a classic homemade chocolate chip cookies but I’m picky.
Timothy: Does it have to be burnt around the edges or are you more of a like.
Jacob: My wife makes them how I like them.
Timothy: Okay well then, I’m not going to venture into that.
Jacob: Well, I’m just, it’s hard to describe other than I know what I like.
Timothy: Well chocolate chip cookies aren’t my favorite but my favorites are the ones where they’re kind of black and around the edge is. My wife when she obviously was alive kind of thing used to overcook a few just for me because most people don’t like that. So, you can go into some psychoanalysis, psychoanalysis.
Jacob: Psycho analysis.
Timothy: Can you believe it is snowing out there?
Jacob: It’s pretty crazy.
Timothy: Those are really. Lovely. Almost want to stop and couldn’t go play in them. Alright, snacks. We’re talking about snacks. If you were on trial and you were found guilty whether you’re actually guilty or not, that’s a whole another topic. That’s kind of what we’re talking about but you’re found guilty, right?
Jacob: Okay.
Timothy: Judge is going to sentence you.
Jacob: Yes.
Timothy: When would be the best time for you to receive your sentence?
Jacob: When’s the best time?
Timothy: Or conversing when would be the worst time to receive your judgement.
Jacob: I don’t know. The way they do it now is you’re found guilty. You’re hauled away. And then you come back for your sentencing trial. I believe it would be called.
Timothy: I don’t, it’s not a trial but you’re sentencing court.
Jacob: Yeah, it’s two separate things. They split it up.
Timothy: Oh yeah, they split it up so what at your, I don’t know if you’re doing your usual delay asked questions or not. This is.
Jacob: Yeah, well so but if I’m…
Timothy: it’s really pretty simple.
Jacob: If I’m guilty
Timothy: What time of the day Would you want that judge to sentence you?
Jacob: Oh, physically time of the day?
Timothy: Yeah.
Jacob: Oh, it doesn’t matter. I’m guilty. I’m going to be pretty distraught.
Timothy: Wrong, oh turkey breath. You are totally wrong.
Jacob: Okay.
Timothy: They have done studies. Judges are much more lenient right after they’ve had a snack.
Jacob: Oh okay.
Timothy: It’s like studies out there everywhere.
Jacob: Okay sure.
Timothy: Well, no to be lenient right after they’ve had their and they have an hour and a half lunch break folks by the way. An hour and a half lunch break.
Jacob: So specifically, lunch not snack.
Timothy: No. Snack time lunch time.
Jacob: Okay.
Timothy: Doesn’t really matter.
Jacob: Okay.
Timothy: Anytime, after they’ve had their belly full whether it be their chocolate chip cookies or snack or whatever or even their lunch little break, they are far more likely judges are far more likely to be lenient and cooperative. As the day progresses after lunch as you near the time when they, oh they want to go home and you know I think most of them are like 3 o’clock. But anyway, three to five they want to go home. They want their dinner meal. That is the worst the worst time. The study show you almost get nothing in terms of leniency.
Jacob: Sure.
Timothy: It’s like zero right after lunch wears off. So, snacks is where it’s at with these judges. So, go ahead and play the snack clip here to let me put this in perspective and we’re going to look at Philippians chapter 3 right around verse 18.
Video: You’ve heard of snap judgments, well watch out for snack judgment. Want mercy from the court? Wait until after lunch. Judges strike guilt more often before snack time. Judges strike guilty more often before lunch break. Judges strike guilty more often before dinner time. After snack you ask. After lunch you languish to know. Judges are more lenient after their little snacks. Judges are more linen after their hour and a half lunches. Conclusion: Philippians 3:18-19. “Many live as enemies of the cross of Christ. Their God is their and their glory is their shame. Is it justice or just us?” The Consider Podcast. Www.consider.info, where the rubber meets the road.
Timothy: Let’s look at Philippians 3:18 verse through 19. Little bit more detail there, Jacob. You want to go ahead and read those two verses?
Jacob: Philippians 3:18.
Timothy: 19.
Jacob: 18 &19. “For, as I have often told you before and now say again, even with tears, many live as enemies of the cross of Christ. Their destiny is destruction, their God is their stomach, and their glory is in their shame. Their mind is on earthly things.”
Timothy: Their God is their stomach. Jurors, they judge with flesh. Whatever they feel like on the outside. Whereas your judges, it has to do with their stomach. They have their little special social clubs. In fact, they get discounts. They’re all, it’s all kind of in the notes of good old boys and girls club kind of routine. It’s just clear from the facts and from the stats. Now, can you get people to argue the facts and the stats, of course. But it’s just pretty obvious that if you want some leniency from a judge right after lunch is the time to happen or even a good decent snack would take place because why? Their God is their stomach and they refuse to repent. What do you think, Jacob? Is that all sound valid? Am I way off like on the end of the Earth kind of routine?
Jacob: Oh no, I think it sounds valid.
Timothy: Or more like pirate guidelines. I think everybody’s familiar with pirate guidelines anymore.
Jacob: I think yeah, generally speaking, people’s mood is always better after their little tummies are full.
Timothy: Alright, good. So, I got you lured into that. We’re in agreement here, right?
Jacob: Okay, yeah.
Timothy: Let’s, I’m going to go a little bit deeper and this one’s going to like shoot me in the foot. So, let’s play that little warning clip because this is going to get no offensive to some. Let’s just put it that way more so than others. Go ahead.
Video: The noise ahead is offensive. Double offensive. Watch the host dance as he shoots himself in the foot. Galatians 4:16. “Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth?” The Consider Podcast. www.consider.info, where the rubber meets a road.
Timothy: It’s common knowledge. I mean people see that in their own homes, right? If dad’s had a big meal and you need to approach him for something. I mean, we all pick and choose those times when mom, dad, brother, sister who are in a good mood, right? I mean, we make jokes about that fact. So, we’re clearly a people judges or whatever influenced by their belly, how full it is, how much they want to go home or what they want to do. They’re just fleshly worldly because it takes a cross of Christ for all of us to get past those kinds of things where belly doesn’t mean anything or flesh doesn’t mean anything. Our emotions don’t mean anything. That’s just God has to begin that process of putting us to death in order that we might really make true judgments. Alright, that’s it. So, is it really true that snacks affect our life, Jacob?
Jacob: Do snacks? Yes, snacks certainly affect our life.
Timothy: Could you give me a like one big scripture that proves like that without a shadow of a doubt at least among those who know Jesus that this is a fact.
Jacob: Jacob and Esau and he wanted the lentil soup and he sold his birth right.
Timothy: That’s a good one. I go further back to Genesis. When Eve came in and she did the cooking, say here’s a fruit. I made a mistake one time in a sermon calling an apple. Oh, I got in trouble because it’s not really necessarily an apple. It just says fruit.
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: But I’m not bitter. That’s just how it goes. Anyway, we are influenced by food. That’s how we fell in the Garden of Eden. So, I’m not going to try and prove this to secular people but it’s very clear even in society. If the judge is happy, you’re going to be more happy and so on, right?
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: Alright, let’s go on a little bit for it. We’ve talked about when jury duty, they have a whole list of questions. We’re eventually going to dive into that but they know what news you watch, where your friends are, what you do, all kinds of stuff. It just is you kind of have to full disclosure everything you are just to get on the jury pool, right?
Jacob: Correct.
Timothy: Well, it’s about time we have full disclosure on judges and prosecutors. I know I had emailed or contacted King County prosecutors going, yeah, can I get the drug test for the prosecutors? Oh, we don’t do drug tests. We don’t do drug test on judges. How come they don’t have to live by the minimum basic standards that we all live with. That should be just random drug tests. We should know whether they’re on counseling. Are they taking prescription drugs for antidepressants, right? Wouldn’t that seem reasonable in logic?
Jacob: It would seem very reasonable.
Timothy: Are they alcoholics? Are they diabetics? Are, we could just go down the line, right?
Jacob: Correct.
Timothy: Well, here’s the part where I’m going to shoot myself on the foot but it’s factuals that can be and why? No woman is really qualified to be a judge or a prosecutor. Because they operate, their mind is set in a more emotional place than a man. Is that not a fact, Jacob?
Jacob: That is correct.
Timothy: When fetus is in the womb and the hormones are flowing and it’s going toward being a female, the brain takes on a different function, a different way that it works, correct?
Jacob: Correct.
Timothy: Than the male. When the male grows up and until we start messing with it, everybody has and this isn’t to look down on a woman is to say that we’re each made different. So, why do you think our trials are becoming more and more about emotional issues than the actual facts of a trial?
Jacob: I think the other statistical fact is that the America as a whole and yes, I will lump in the judicial system and the powers that be are all becoming more feminine.
Timothy: Correct.
Jacob: Everybody, masculinity is gone.
Timothy: And not only that, they’re anti male.
Jacob: Correct. They’re anti male. You should not be masculine You should not be a men man. You should be emotional like us AKA women.
Timothy: So, every judge should have to state is it her time of the month? There’s been no studies on that. How does that affect? We know that that anyone who has daughters or raised daughters knows when it’s their time of the month. Do they not know?
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: The whole household knows. They know the women know. Their body goes through all kinds of biological changes. What about menopause? Or just normal fluctuate up and down that are going on. That’s just basic biology and facts. And so, women jurors, women judges, by nature are more emotionally driven and you’d want it that way. Literally again, I’m going to this is a positive thing. I know there’s a lot of negative stuff but you want a mother who mothers their children, right? Sympathy. Go ahead.
Jacob: Well, it is positive if you’re actually going to be a mother. That’s a totally different separate sort of issue, of course which is in America at an alarming rate the women are all working and have careers and no one’s actually raising your child. You’re turning them over to daycares the public school system. Anyway, so it’s yeah, anyways. I’m throwing that in there because…
Timothy: No, that’s huge.
Jacob: Because that’s, but you know what I mean? Because yeah, because women aren’t raising their kids, somebody else is raising their kids. But yes, you want them to be emotional because the emotions are there to help raise the kids in that capacity.
Timothy: Correct, and then you need the husband and the man in the house who brings in a logical and they complement each other. That’s supposed to be what’s going on and that’s where love between a man and a woman takes place. There’s an appreciation that we’re not made the same and you would I wouldn’t want to marry me. Let’s just put it that way. Don’t worry girls, I’m not on the market so you’re safe. You get my point. So, we get women become one like one judge goes, I wanted to be a judge or lawyer since I was 8 years old. Which means then she sacrificed being a mother. And so, all of those emotions and if she dropped her kids off at daycare, that means she’s sacrificing her children for the sake of her career. There’s not even the basis of what would be called motherly love and all of that emotion has gotten twisted up and perverted around and brought into the courtroom which has nothing to do with facts of a crime and that’s why you find this constant emotion.
Oh, they were a good person or they’re this person or this harm was done. That all emotional baggage junk that never allows you to actually get to the truth of the matter, I can remember many times the father comes in, he’s more, he’s going to discipline the child he wants the facts and the mother’s not over here debating the facts normally should. But he’s a child, he’s only three, he’s only four, is naturally defensive for the child whether it’s based on reason or logic or not. And I’m not saying they don’t balance each other, but when you get a courtroom where you’ve got women prosecutors women on the jury. I mean, the case we went through. It wasn’t, the jury themselves stated didn’t have anything to do with the facts, didn’t have anything to do with this over here. It had to do with that the accuser happened to baby talk like a ten-year-old on the stand. Those are all motherly instincts that have nothing to do with make judgments within a courtroom and that’s one reason among many reasons.
Is that to say that men were perfect? No, there’s been plenty of injustice coming down to the ages but what we’re seeing Now is a huge influx and increase. Just look at the way all that’s going on in the United States. Look at the corruption that’s going on. That’s because it’s a feminization of the judicial process. Any comments on that now that I’ve shot myself in the foot?
Jacob: No.
Timothy: Anything you want to add before we kind of, we’re going to play Jan’s interview again if she’s the one that heard about the Dog and Pony Show. So, I want to go through that a little bit here and there and kind of jump in here and there. Anything though that before you want to go with anything else Jacob?
Jacob: No.
Timothy: I do. Let’s go ahead and play. Play no Roman soldier and let’s discuss that for just a minute.
Jacob: Okay.
Video: Remember, no Roman soldier at the crucifixion repented. Remember, no governing authority repented of killing court evidence. Remember, no prison guard who whipped Jesus repented. Do remember, it was a criminal crucified next to Jesus on the cross that repented. Luke 23:41, “The criminal declared I am punished justly, getting what my crimes deserve. Remember me, Jesus.” The podcast. www.consider.info. Where the rubber meets the road.
Timothy: I’m going to tie that bumper with this next one. Jacob, go ahead and play did not say What did Jesus not say?
Video: Jesus did not say support your local police. Jesus did not say remember law and order. Jesus did not say lock the scum of the earth up. What Jesus did say is, “I was a stranger and you did not invite me in. I needed clothes and you did not clothe me. I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.” Matthew 25:43, “Submit to governing authority but look after those in prison.” Center Podcast. www.consider.info. Where the rubber meets the road.
Timothy: Jacob, you ever been in a Christian bookstore and found a book on jury duty?
Jacob: No.
Timothy: Really, not one.
Jacob: No.
Timothy: Think about the way. I did the same thing. It’s like, I went out and started searching the web. See if I could find a book because I want to make sure it’s like, I’ve never ever one time seen a book on jury duty for Christians. How can that possibly be? Is there not so much throughout all of scripture that God is a God of justice.
Jacob: Yes.
Timothy: That he’s come with justice.
Jacob: Yes.
Timothy: That every prosecutor and judge, bailiff, minion that works there should be very afraid about working within the justice system. You really kind of have to be almost a fool about your soul to even go, I want to be a policeman or I want to be working in the judicial system really. You want to stand before God and say these are all of my judgments what I did but anyway, back to my original point. There is not is I cannot find a single book on jury duty for Christians. Now think about that but what are the ramifications? What does that tell us, Jacob?
Jacob: Well, I and only because I don’t even know if there’s any secular books like how to be a good jury. Are those out there?
Timothy: There are a few, they look, the covers look really old and they look self-published.
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: Speaking from experience. They weren’t quality books.
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: And let me add a little warning here, please. No one’s who a lawyer go write a book on jury duty for Christians. You don’t have the right perspective. Don’t do it. Don’t do it. If you were within the legal system, you are not qualified to write a book on jury duty and justice for Christians. So, please don’t do that. Fortunately, or unfortunately depends how you look at it. God hasn’t called me to write a book on it, but it’s just not out there. It goes back to what did Jesus say. He didn’t say support law and order. He didn’t say, go visit a prosecutor or visit your local police station or vote conservative values. What did Jesus say Jacob?
Jacob: Well, now I’m thinking of the two bumpers because they were.
Timothy: Yeah, that’s right.
Jacob: Well.
Timothy: Go visit those in prison.
Jacob: Correct.
Timothy: That’s who you’re supposed to look at. Now the other bumper did any of the Roman soldiers who would have been the place at the time repent and crucifying Jesus.
Jacob: Okay none of them, definitely there’s no documentation that they repented. There’s only the, oh it would have been an omission after he died. The soldier says surely this was the son of God or it’s something very close.
Timothy: Sure, they acknowledge. You don’t hear them go on and go, man, I can’t believe what I did.
Jacob: No.
Timothy: It can’t even build.
Jacob: Well, no so and that’s the only question. Absolutely, you are correct. In scripture, there is no they repented you.
Timothy: There’s no record.
Jacob: There’s no record.
Timothy: There’s no record. I’m not, part that.
Jacob: Maybe that one, well there’s only one record of one soldier so even if we were to hypothesize or hope that the one soldier that said that did go repent, but that’s still one out of a lot that were there.
Timothy: Correct, and again scripture’s not recording that they actually repented.
Jacob: Correct.
Timothy: Well, what’s really messing this up is Hollywood has all of its versions of somebody repenting who there’s no record of them repenting. The movie The Robe is based on that kind of concept.
Jacob: Yes, that’s true.
Timothy: So, we get this in our head that like, oh the sure they repent, and it would if it, you have to kind of almost say if there was a Roman soldier or one of the Pharisees or the Sadducees or somebody that actually repented of condemning Jesus you would have thought that would have been recorded. Now am I totally discounting that it wasn’t, no that’s not what I’m saying, but.
Jacob: Well, your point is still valid even with my little like well maybe there was one guy who did. The point is still valid though even if that was the case like even if you were like fine Hollywood, you can have your one guy who repented.
Timothy: Correct, you can go with that either way it either way. One way to word is well God didn’t consider it significant to put in there, but he did to put Jesus to say visit me in prison.
Jacob: Correct.
Timothy: And by the way, I’ve tried to get into prisons with the gospel and never had much success very long because you know why Jacob?
Jacob: They probably weren’t inviting you in.
Timothy: They wouldn’t let me in.
Jacob: Okay.
Timothy: But guess who wouldn’t let me in?
Jacob: Who wouldn’t let you in?
Timothy: The Christian pastors that work in the prison.
Jacob: For sure. Yeah, they’re like they’re in, they like you.
Timothy: So that was the first set of options. Yeah. But can you imagine some Warden give me a call say yeah, we really need the full gospel that shows no favoritism to guard or prisoners or anybody else. Can you come in here and lay out the whole gospel like lay down it not going to happen.
Jacob: No,
Timothy: Now I’m really deviating. Alright, any comments where we kind of dive a little bit into Jan’s interview concerning jury duty being a Dog and Pony show?
Timothy: No.
Jacob: Remember I was talking about that experiment. It’s called the authoritative experience. Where they take a group of people. I’ll see if I can explain it. We’re going to play a clip here in a minute. It’s a little bit long but people need to really listen to understand what goes on. This has been documented over and over again. It would say I’m a psychologist. I bring somebody in and it’s all play acting on one side. What happens is there’s a volunteer sitting in a panel and on the panels of like say 30 different buttons and each button goes up higher in terms of voltage. In another room is an individual that works for me and every time a button gets flipped, you kind of scream equal to the voltage of the button. Am I making sense?
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: What I do as a psychologist, I stand there say with a clipboard or a white jacket or I’m the official the authority in it. And the volunteer that’s sitting here in front of the buttons doesn’t know this is going on, but you’ve been told every time they go a little bit higher with the voltage you scream louder. And what they discovered is as long as the authority figure was there saying oh no go ahead trust me go for go up to the next button, go next. Most of people would go wind up going to the extreme level with the guy is screaming in the other room going, no, stop, stop. This video I’m going to play is very mild compared to actually what took place if you if you listen to it or watch or anything the people are like screaming in the other room of course the voltage isn’t going up it’s all play acting. And I believe you and at some point, the person in the other room that’s doing the screaming just actually shuts up as if he died and the authority figure still saying, yeah, keep going keep going and the person keeps going and keeps going. This is such a famous a story that when I was in college for a short period of time, didn’t graduate. That’s a whole different sub story. This experiment’s like repeated all time in every semester because it’s one of the few verifiable things you can do. It’s just solid.
It came out of the World War II where the Nazis got people who do all kinds of horrendous things. So, there was this interesting study in like why would people do this and how far would they go? Why this is important is and I’ll say Seattle King County prosecutors, Washington State are the most, some of the most manipulative jury aspects going on but I say it with qualification because it’s probably true in every state and if you look at what certain political people are going through, it’s very clear that jury manipulation at is a very high point. The next step is just literally just lynch mob type territory. Anything before we actually play this video clip, Jacob?
Jacob: No.
Timothy: Alright, go ahead and it’s the Milgram Experiment and let’s go ahead and listen to this or watch it if you’ve got video.
Milgram Video: Are ordinary people able to do terrible things? And if so, how many would give a strong electric shock to an innocent other just because they are following an order? To answer these questions, we can look at the controversial work of a man who just wanted to find answers to his family’s horrific past.
In 1961, Stanley Milgram, a young psychologist, wanted to find out how ordinary citizens were able to commit acts of unspeakable evil in Nazi Germany. His theory, some people do horrific things because they obey even the most wicked leaders. To test his theory, Milgram designed a clever experiment that changed our understanding of human behavior forever. The Milgram experiment involved three people, an authority called the experimenter, who was dressed in a lab coat to appear powerful, a volunteer who was assigned to be the teacher and a victim, the so-called student. The teacher was the test subject whereas the experimenter and student were both actors.
Following orders, the teacher would test the student who is sitting in another room by asking them questions. For every wrong answer, the experimenter would ask the teacher to inflict an electric shock up to a life threatening 450 volts. Before he began, Milgram asked his colleagues what they expected the outcome to be. Almost all of them agreed that only a few of the volunteers would obey and inflict electric shocks on innocent others. What do you think? Would anyone administer shocks higher than 300 volts? Milgram then advertised his experiment as a study on memory and learning at the campus of Yale University. People signed up without any idea of what they were really getting themselves into.
The experiment began with the volunteers meeting the other participants. The volunteers then pulled a card to draw their role. Little did they know that they could only draw the teacher. Next, they would be given a sample of a light electric shock in order to experience firsthand what the others would have to go through. To start, the experimenter and the teacher were seated in one room and the student was strapped to a chair in an adjacent room. The teacher and student were able to communicate but not see each other. The experimenter then gave the teacher a list of questions. The teacher would then read out the questions and the student would press a button to indicate a response. For every false answer, the teacher would administer a shock starting at 15 volts and increasing in 15 volt increments up to 450.
What the teacher didn’t know was that the student didn’t actually receive any shocks. Instead, a tape recorder was used to play various responses. In the beginning, the teacher would hear protest or bangs against the wall. If shocks would increase, the reactions would become louder and in case someone would go all the way, the learner would fall silent. In case the teacher became hesitant and asked to stop, the experimenter would resort to the following four prompts. First, he would say, “please continue.” If that was unsuccessful, he would go on with the experiment requires that you continue. Then, it is absolutely essential that you continue and lastly, you have no other choice. You must go on.
Along the way, the volunteers displayed signs of extreme tension such as sweating, trembling, and even uncontrollable laughing fits. The experiment would be stopped only after all four prompts had been used or the maximum voltage of 450 volts had been given 3x. Milgram found that of all participants 100% gave at least 300 volts and 65% went all the way to 450 volts. The experiment was later criticized for being unethical, because it deceived innocent people into performing what seemed to be terrible acts of violence. However, his experiment was successfully replicated many times involving different populations and leading to similar findings. Milgram himself left us with this to think about. It may be that we are puppets. Puppets controlled by the strings of society but at least we are puppets with perception, with awareness, and perhaps our awareness is the first step to our liberation.
What do you think? Would you follow or question the orders if you are one of Milgram’s participants? And what can we as a society teach future generations to help prevent horrific acts that can happen when ordinary people blindly follow an authority? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.
Timothy: Think, my comments would mean anything Jacob?
Jacob: What do you mean your comments?
Timothy: Well, she asked for comments.
Jacob: Oh, yeah.
Timothy: Change society.
Jacob: I think you had briefly mentioned that when you were in college which would be quite a few number of years ago the thing I there’s no way they’re even going over this experiment in college today.
Timothy: Well, correct. I mean it’s common knowledge, no there’s because it looks official and somebody wants to do a project in psychology class.
Jacob: Oh sure, I guess. I’d still be shocked.
Timothy: I’m, not disagreeing with you.
Jacob: I would wager that most like they even probably, I mean even just by watching the video, right? Even to anybody you’d be like, whoa, that’s crazy. Whoa, that’s interesting. Like and I don’t know. I’m still shocked if any college nowadays even has that. The colleges nowadays it would all be about LGBTQ plus experiments and all sorts of weird stuff.
Timothy: Not disagreeing with you. Let me just kind of add to that a little bit. No, no. They’re aware of this and they use it to juries.
Jacob: Correct.
Timothy: See, back then they looked at this goal. This is bad. How can we change society? How can we keep from becoming Nazis?
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: Well, the answer to that is you can’t. That’s the quick answer.
Jacob: Sure.
Timothy: Without Jesus Christ is not going to happen but on the flip side, Mark Larson was a prosecutor. He was an expert in eyewitness testimony. Meaning, he wasn’t using that to discern who was truth and who was lying. He was using it to figure out how to get that witness to say what he wanted them to say on the stand. Everything about that’s been proven. So, they’re all aware of this. In fact, as we look at the King County Prosecutor’s jury selection process, they’re playing to this. They’re fine. You notice in the study, he said 65% of the people went to 450 volts, right?
Jacob: So, they killed somebody.
Timothy: Correct.
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: But now, switch that up to jury duty. Meaning, you’re going to get rid of the other 40% or 45% that actually would not flip the button.
Jacob: Correct.
Timothy: So, the goal of the judge and the goal of the prosecutor and the system itself is to make sure those that wouldn’t do it. In fact, 100% went to 300 votes.
Jacob: Correct.
Timothy: So, you get rid of those people and you wind up with a jury pool of 95% of the people that will follow the authorities and go all the way up the line. You can’t even get in.
Jacob: Correct.
Timothy: That’s why this is important. They have refined the corruption so that it’s deep seated so you get a bunch of emotional jurors sitting there feeding off the whatever the prosecution and the judges in line, believe me, with the prosecutor, their no separation going on. And there may be a little slyer about it but that they’re not for your defense. Even in this there’s this Auburn. Is it Auburn police? Jeff Nelson Jacob?
Jacob: Yeah, I think it’s Auburn.
Timothy: There’s just to give you an example how anti-defense and anti-truth judges are. He had a lot of tattoos on his body and a lot of policemen do. The prosecution of course wanted to introduce a couples 7, 8, 10, I don’t know. Maybe all of the tattoos to demonstrate what he was think when he overreached supposedly his authority and shot somebody, right? So, they go, oh look, he’s got a tattoo it’s got this saying on there, so he’s a killer when he gets up in the morning and he’s a killer on the beat and he’s going to pull the gun and he’s going to kill because the tattoo. It just shows what is in mind. That’s what they want to play.
Jacob: Yes.
Timothy: And only a literal dumb down authoritative manipulated jury pool will go, oh yeah, you can read minds by at tattoos. Never mind the fact that tattoos are legal and shouldn’t even be brought into courtroom but it’s a far stretch to go from there to a mindset without any other proof of evidence. I don’t want to go too far into that. Here’s what happened. The defense of course objected to the fact that the judge was going to release these tattoos out to the public. Well, I was also objecting to the fact that the.
Jacob: Well, the prosecutors wanted to release it to the jury.
Timothy: That’s right.
Jacob: That’s what they were after. They wanted to bring it in as evidence. The defense objects.
Timothy: That’s correct. And the judge was agreeing so then okay the reason I’m getting because it gets kind of muddled up. Meaning the judge is going back and forth. I don’t know what I want allowed in the courtroom for the jury. So, the next best thing for the prosecution is to get it released out into the public. Give it to the news medias. Are you following me? Did I make myself clear on that?
Jacob: Yeah, well I think yes, she was going back and forth and then she kind of, it’s almost like she went down the middle because she would, I don’t think the jurors were allowed to see it but she said it could be released to the public.
Timothy: Yeah, you’re getting to my point. She didn’t go down the middle. She still cited the prosecution.
Jacob: Correct. Yeah.
Timothy: In other words, logic was, no, I’m not going to let the jury base his case on tattoos. This is about the facts of did he do it or did he not do it? Whether he had a tattoo or didn’t have a tattoo. He could’ve changed his attitude when he was 16 when got the tattoo. It’s a whole monkey mire of emotions.
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: She was actually agreeing with the defense and saying, yeah, the jury shouldn’t see this, right?
Jacob: Correct.
Timothy: Then it shifted to well we wanted to be released to the public. When naturally the prosecution wanted that. The judge said that the defense dropped its opposition to it being released to the newspapers and the news media. Therefore, she was releasing it to the news media in spite of the fact that it is inflammatory type evidence that would not be brought into the courtroom. By default, she should be ensuring the rights of the accused. If it’s legal then it shouldn’t be released to the news media.
Jacob: Correct. Yeah. If you’re not going to show it to the jurors then you should show it to anybody.
Timothy: That is correct.
Jacob: It shouldn’t be released.
Timothy: And she’s even agreeing with the defense out front saying, yeah, you’re right. I’m not going to bring this in the courtroom. I see your point. I think there was even some agreement that really, I should release it to the public, right? I shouldn’t put it out for news media. But the defense drops its objection and so the result the naked response so to speak of the judge is to go give the prosecution what it wants instead of saying no the basic rights the bill of rights the constitution, those kinds of things apply by default in this courtroom therefore they’re not even to go out in public. Instead, she did a slide of hand where she goes, well, because the problem or because the defense dropped their objection I’m going to go ahead and release it to the news media. Did I explain that clear enough?
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: So, I want to emphasize that again. By default, every judge should be, I shouldn’t have to pay a lawyer to babysit the prosecution. It didn’t matter. I can tell you why the defense keeps dropping their objections because this is not the first time, they’ve done that. Why do you think the defense has dropped? Like there’s been two or three issues come up and eventually the defense just drops its objection. Do you know why Jacob?
Jacob: I’m only guessing. I think probably because they’re so busy. You only have so much energy, and so for their, the thing that’s blatantly in their face at that moment was don’t release it to the jury so they fight, fight, fight and the judge agrees to that portion of it. So, then you’re just tired and worn out and you don’t have enough money to bill enough hours so then this other stuff slips through.
Timothy: Well, you actually got to it. It all had to do with money.
Jacob: Sure.
Timothy: Everything about the defense if anybody’s ever been…
Jacob: II’s billable hours. You’re going to be billing.
Timothy: Well, I’m not trying to blame the defense but that’s a little bit different story. The point I’m saying that the defense everything they do comes down to do we have the money to do it or not.
Jacob: Correct. Yeah, well because you’re billing the clients.
Timothy: You’re billing the client, that’s right.
Jacob: If you’re Trump and you’re a millionaire you can hire endless lawyers really. He’s got the money, but if you’re just [CROSSTALK 39:18]
Timothy: and look they’re burying him, so just apply that to the average joke that I know.
Jacob: That’s what I mean. Like Trump barely has a shot, right? Like it’s still a 50/50 and he’s like I don’t know if he’s a billionaire. He’s he has, I mean they say he literally has like two hundred million dollars cash just laying around in bank accounts.
Timothy: Correct.
Jacob: And it’s actually more than that. So anyways, but yeah to your point which is yeah you, yeah.
Timothy: Alright, so when we went through what we went through and experienced the corruption within Seattle King County courts. Everything on the defense side had to do with time and money. The longer that we went out the more money we had to spend.
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: And the faster we became broke. Which was exactly what the prosecutor and the judge wanted. They just want to bust you financially. There would have been a ton of things that could have been ejected to that we possibly could’ve won on if we had the cash. In fact, it probably wouldn’t go to trial. We’d had enough private investigators that actually would have done what detective McCall was supposed to do and go to the house and examine and see that the crime was impossible. But money was in short supply and King County prosecutors were after destroy WinePress Publishing, Sound Doctrine Church, and run us out of town and that’s exactly what happened.
If anybody thinks I’m like just blowing smoke, there’s testimony to this fact. You have detective McCall at the very beginning of his grooming situation and his hate crime emailing King County prosecutors had already been talking to a bunch of people and already been talking to Grant McCall saying, yeah, the key to winning this case or bringing down these people is to go after the church. That’s what all of this was about. So, you had this emotional feel-good situation going on a jury pool that was introduced to all these feelings about religion with no, zero-evidence presented by the prosecution that the crime had even happened or that it could have happened. I don’t want to go too far off in it. So, you get this authoritative going on.
So, the reason the defense and the prosecutor, look, if you’re on a jury pool and you’re sitting there and you’re smart enough to get in there to throw justice into the system, just know that on a flat-out minimum level. The prosecutors and the judge are fully corrupt and their only goal is to bankrupt you either financially or emotionally so that you do not have the strength and the energy to put up a defense. Forget this notion about a vigorous defense. It doesn’t happen. They are wearing you down so that you cannot defend yourself. So, by the time you get before an emotional dumb down jury pool, you do look like a battling it. It doesn’t know what’s going on. You’re just kind of flat out.
In fact, we pushed it along and we drove this trial as fast as we could but everybody was massively wore out. When we got there except of course the prosecution. They have unlimited funds. They’ve got secretaries. They’ve got non-profit groups. They’ve got everybody in their brother on a social scale going on. Plus, of course, it was a white male, Christian. It was a minority judge. It was a minority girl that could do the false accusations on Grant McCall and his co-conspirator knew exactly who to groom. Add that in to the Milgram experiment where the authorities come in and go, oh, you’re here for jury to be. I got to bring up one of the point before we press on. Anything before we go any further?
Jacob: No.
Timothy: There’s a central theme that has been exposed. All sinners have a pattern. Sin makes us stupid and so we just kind of operate like a dog or a cat or whatever we are. Just only spiritual people that are being crucified have a dynamic personality kind of all over the place, because they’re being made and formed into the image of Jesus Christ. You never quite know what they’re going to be or can or should do or whatever else. I’m not talking crazy stuff. I’m just meaning they are outside the box of what most people are trapped in because again, sin makes you absolutely stupid and just a single child-like pattern. Nah, okay. So, there’s a pattern that happens in these juries. You’ll often hear them come out and go, let me pause here for a fact so that people can let this sink in and they’ll say something to the effect of, well, I knew this is very important. A lot of lives would be affected by this.
They’re puffed up. They’re like the prosecution. They’re like the judge. They’re part of the system. They’re the clipboard people. They’ve got the white robes on. They’re pushing the buttons. They’re supporting people and what they do is of significant. A lot of lives are affected. They’re going to change society. It’s all this emotional cause. Not you know, no longer. Make sense, Jacob.
Jacob: Yeah, I get what you’re saying.
Timothy: They had to hang the posters. I have the four-jury duty, four types of jury posters. They should hang that in the lobby. As people come in to do jury duty. Or how about the old black and white movie. 12 angry men. Now it’s just 12 support groups for social causes. They don’t allow anyone remotely with independent thinking to get in on the jury pool. And we’re pushing the time up above. But let’s begin to play Jan’s testimony and then I want to dive in a little bit deeper on some of her basic points.
I probably need to who Jan is because actually for those that know God, this is a praiseworthy situation. Jan was a part of the hate crime. She was the accountant of WinePress Publishing. She went through the full-on corruption of the Enumclaw Police and King County prosecutors. And by the way, they refuse to repent even though we’ve proving everything they accused us of being wrong. Jan was highly involved, experienced the pain and some she lost all her worldly goods and go on and so forth. She just happened years later to be called a jury duty and wound up being on the case where the prosecutor called it a Dog and Pony Show. I’m not, if you’re in Jesus Christ you know what’s going on. You understand what I’m saying. This this is out of the norm. I don’t know what the odds would be if you calculated it but there it is. So that’s who Jan is.
Jacob: We’re here to talk about your experience with jury duty because I myself have never even I’ve never been on a jury. I’ve never been inside the courtrooms where all this stuff goes down. So today we’re recording this on April the 7th 2024 and Jan, first take me back to just a few of the specific details. What day did your experience happen on?
Jan: Well, Mine was back in 2006.
Jacob: Okay.
Jan: I was there October 17th, 18th, and 20th, 3 days.
Jacob: Oh, okay.
Timothy: Jacob, let me stop you there just a minute. I’m going to interrupt and don’t feel like you got to pick up the same spot. Do you have the play prosecutor Seawall video handy there, because this is let’s remind people what happened is a prosecutor when she was at jury duty flat out stated the obvious that this is a dog and pony show. So, we have confirmation from the prosecutor’s office, King County prosecutors, judges that you being selected for jury duty, you are part of a dog and pony show. So, understand clearly, they’re only looking down with you with contempt like we can manipulate you. We can bring you in and they can. They can. I’m not arguing the point. So, you’re part of the Dog and Pony Show if you make it. Unless you’re so shrewd and smart to get in and do justice. And based on the questions that we’re going to look at and what she went through, that would almost be impossible. You’d really have to compromise who you are. Did you find that clip?
Video: Jury selection. October 2006, Washington State. Seattle King County Prosecutors, Courtroom 4G. Prosecutor Paul Sewell, have you been selected for jury duty in the past? Then you have been through this dog and pony show before. The Consider Podcast, examining today’s madness, folly, and wisdom. www.consider.info.
Timothy: Okay this is the overshadow of what we’re talking about. So, let’s continue on listening to her and then I’ll just jump in and interrupt.
Jacob: A few of the specific details. What day did your experience happen on?
Jan: Well, Mine was back in 2006.
Jacob: Okay.
Jan: I was there October 17th, 18th, and 20th, 3 days.
Jacob: Oh, okay. And so, tell me just go ahead and start the story. What okay well first let’s go and back up real quick. So, what happened? You get like a summons in the mail, right? Isn’t that how jury duty all starts?
Jan: Yes, I got a summons in the mail saying that I would be summons and to call to find out when and where. Which I did and they told me to show up on October 17th for my first interview. And so, on the 17th I went to the court, to the courthouse Superior Courthouse in Kent. And I was assigned well actually, okay, when I arrived, I went to the jury room. Oh, my goodness, the jury room was crowded. There were so many people in there, people were talking on their phones, computers. I don’t know these puzzles set out all over the place for people to do on tables. There were vending machines. People getting snacks there it was a very unsettling atmosphere. I mean…
Jacob: Okay, and this is, oh I’m going to slow down just a smidge only because this is in King County is my understanding, right? I don’t know if you specified.
Jan: Yes.
Timothy: Jacob, just pause it out a little bit. Alright, let’s picture the scene here. There’s no structure about what’s being happening. There’s no education. There’s nothing about the Bill of Rights, the constitution, full disclosure, again, drug test for prosecutors and drug tests for judges, what your responsibilities, they would do well to even just play the movie 12 Angry Men instead of a bunch of puzzles around there to let people know how serious a they’re marching into but you understand the state doesn’t want you taking this serious.
Jacob: Correct.
Timothy: The state wants you taking them serious which is different than actually taking the case serious. Yeah, I think you actually go on and say, I haven’t actually listened to this thing word for word like we’re doing now and they were just being heard around like cattle. There’s no direction. There’s no order. At this point, it’s just kind of a schizophrenic experience.
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: Okay, go ahead.
Jan: Yes. King County and Kent Washington.
Jacob: Okay, yeah. That’s where, that’s the courthouse you went to.
Jan: Yes.
Jacob: Okay. And the rooms they stick you in a room. So, when you like you show up, you enter the courthouse doors and you report to a specific room.
Jan: Yes, and they say yeah go to the jury room.
Jacob: Oh, it’s a room. The jury room and It’s chaotic.
Jan: Yes, it’s very chaotic and it’s mainly chaotic. One of the main reasons is because nobody knows what they’re supposed to do.
Jacob: Oh sure. Yeah. Nothing’s clear.
Timothy: Jacob, I’m going to pause you again. And I tend to give sinners and other people that I’m a repentance by the way more credit like what they’re thinking and going on. So, I may be imposing something like and this is the danger of talking about it because or somebody’s going oh that’s a good idea. Why don’t we do that? So, there’s a real danger in exposing it because they don’t repent. It’s not like they go, oh well, this is wrong. We shouldn’t do it. So, when I say they’re just being herded in and they’re doing all this. You’re creating this chaotic type environment. Uh they could be intentional in the sense of you have this confusion then you bring in the judge and the prosecutor and you start entering into or bringing things into order. You follow so you’re bringing in compliance.
Jacob: Sure, they may be doing the chaotic. They may be creating the environment on.
Timothy: Correct.
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: Now that I said that, of course, like I said, it’s a danger they might actually do it or this stuff was instituted so because you got to be knowing that the colleges and the people involved have studied this thing long before it ever got to this point and they have figured out how to manipulate this social justice or whatever is going on that the state wants. This is a highly manipulative environment. They have chaos, you got kids, you got puzzles, you stuff going on, there’s no order, there’s no really think you’re confused before you ever going to sit down and be quiz by prosecutor and judges. Not a serious helpful environment at all. In fact, one of the main goals here is to get rid of anybody who actually, what am I trying to say here?
Anybody who like if you really take this serious and you’re seriously minded and you really examine the state. My first reaction to walking in this environment would be this is a Dog and Pony Show. I’m not going to be part of it. It’s too many hoops, too much going I’m being manipulated and you leave. So, by nature a lot of the smartest, brightest people know not to even bother to show up. And this is just one more confirmation. Who in the right mind walks into this kind of stupidity and hangs around this kind of crowd and think okay I’m going to sit down with 12 other people and decide the fate of somebody?
Jacob: Yeah, the whole environment, I mean there’s already sort of this like disgust or distaste or like I really just don’t like this. Anybody who’s a rational thinking person probably doesn’t like the chaos and yeah, and then so it’s going to quickly weed you out.
Timothy: The only people you’re left with are emotional people who like the chaos.
Jacob: Yeah, mindless emotional people who either like the chaos or they’re certainly used to it and then so they can you can be manipulated through it.
Timothy: And I do apologize to Jan. I would tease her if she were here that yeah, you’re in that class but anybody else that’s rational, logical, calm thinking, doesn’t we’ll see here in a moment watch Oprah and Doctor Phil and just well-grounded in life and busy and out working on the farm and raising the kids and do the family. It’s going to go. This is nuts. I’m leaving. So, all your rational people are already not even showing up. Keep going. Let’s play a little bit more.
Jan: You just go in this room. You’re waiting and waiting and everyone’s wondering, okay, what’s going to happen, you know? No one knows. Some people just they want to get out of there like ASAP.
Jacob: Oh. Is that a vibe in the room. You can tell a lot of people don’t want to be there.
Jan: Well, it’s kind of a mixed thing. There’re those people that do not want to be there and then there’s other people that are like, well, no. This is something very important that we’re doing. We are participating in the legal system, you know. I can really make a difference and they want to be on the jury.
Timothy: Those of course, the second part she’s talking about are the dangerous folks because they want to make a difference. They’re highly tuned to what the prosecution going to present and how the judge is going to manipulate them, right? The other angle too is it sounds noble like, oh there’s a group of people that want to be there and all that, right? Well, they showed up.
Jacob: Sure.
Timothy: So, they’re already naive and they’re part of the one of the four jurors. They at least show up. They’re really smart people don’t even show up.
Jacob: Well, like she’ll talk about later though that this is the first time she had ever done jury duty because all the other time she had an excuse to get out but this time she didn’t have an excuse to get out. So, some there are, I’m just saying some people whatever attitude some people you have to show up or it’s like I don’t know you get in trouble somehow.
Timothy: Nope.
Jacob: What do you mean nope?
Timothy: Nope, they never prosecute you if you don’t show up.
Jacob: Oh okay. I see, yeah.
Timothy: Never ever, it’s kind of like liars for King County.
Jacob: Sure.
Timothy: If you don’t want to be there, they’re not going to prosecute you and if you’re willing to lie for the prosecution you receive every single evil blessing you can possibly get. No, that’s the ironic part, you’re still naïve. I hear what you’re saying, but no.
Jacob: Because but that’s what they say.
Timothy: They slide out some, we don’t prosecute people who don’t show up for jury dude.
Jacob: But they say that it’s considered what a misdemeanor or something.
Timothy: Well sure, it’s considered a misdemeanor.
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: Technically, well at least committed a misdemeanor but they don’t there is the law and then there is the real application of the law.
Jacob: Yeah, yeah.
Timothy: It’s like, yeah, this is against law but if you’re of a minority or you’re of this pity group you need to be treated much different.
Jacob: Well sure.
Timothy: So, I’m just letting you know I could be wrong and I’m sure lawyers and I’m not advocating you don’t show up because that clearly against the law to advocate one way or another. They don’t want to inform jurors. So, no, you will not. If you ignore that thing, fully ignore it like don’t even check the box or I don’t want to.
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: They’re not going to come get you.
Jacob: Sure.
Timothy: You won’t be pulled over for a speeding ticket and go, oh sir. There’s a warrant out for your right.
Jacob: Oh yeah.
Timothy: You didn’t show up for jury duty.
Jacob: Correct. Yeah.
Timothy: Here’s kind of my dream, right? I don’t show for jury duty and they arrest me. What’s the first thing I’m going to ask for?
Jacob: Public a jury, a jury trial exactly. Well, no wait that’s not what you want because then you’re going to get to work as people.
Timothy: I am being factious. It’s a joke I’ve told myself over the years kind of routine. Yeah. But no, no. I know I’m beating this to death but now it’s a joke. The whole thing is a Dog and Pony Show.
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: Look at what they pay you. Look at what they do.
Jacob: Oh yeah.
Timothy: The whole thing is like we want the stupidest people that are willing to show up. Stay here. Go through all these hoops. She had to come back three days in a row.
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: They’re weeding out anybody that doesn’t want to put any effort for the state.
Jacob: That’s the thing. Even if you do show up the people that she’s even describing who don’t want to be there you got to do is say the right things and you’re for sure going to get booted.
Timothy: Oh correct.
Jacob: You don’t want to be, if you don’t want to be there and even if you did show up that day you can say things to be assured that you won’t end up on an actual jury. You don’t have to be on a trial.
Timothy: And a lot of those people are easily manipulated by flattery. They don’t want to be there, right?
Jacob: Sure.
Timothy: But then the prosecution oh it’s very important that you’re here.
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: It protects society. The fact that you showed up that you’re sitting there. You might be whining complaining. You’re highly you’re already there.
Jacob: Sure.
Timothy: You already feel a sense of authority like I better show up because I’ve been summoned to jury duty.
Jacob: Sure, yeah.
Timothy: And there’s not a repulsion like I don’t want to participate in that in Christ. Again, if God calls me to go, I’ll go. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying I wouldn’t show up. Again, I’m too smart for jury duty. There’s no way I’m going to get in there. And I say no way. Man, you’d have to be awful shrewd and innocent.
Jacob: Well, you’d almost I think you mentioned earlier. There’s yeah, you’d almost be flirting straight up lying to actually end up on the jury, because by the time they start asking the questions and I jumping ahead of the interview because she even says that like some people you raise your little paddle and other people, they would straight up call upon you.
Timothy: Correct.
Jacob: So, if you sit there quietly and you’re technically not lying like they could the very likelihood is they’re going to ask you a direct question and then you’re going to be honest and then they’re going to boot you.
Timothy: And well, and King County goes further than that to weed you out. And I’m jumping ahead too. When they immediately when they say we’re Going to do an Oprah Winfrey and a Doctor Phil encounter session.
Jacob: Sure.
Timothy: You can’t fake it at that point.
Jacob: Yeah, well that’s yeah you so you can’t just sit there and be like I mean you would, it’s every it would be in your, a gut reaction you’d be like, ah. Sitting there squirming and they’re like sir why are you squirming?
Timothy: You might as well you might as well, I’ve been waiting to get the Oprah Winfrey one and we’ll get or Oprah Winfrey. I can’t even say.
Jacob: Oprah Winfrey yeah.
Timothy: That’s how much I watch it. Oh yeah when I when I did a couple the jury dudes did, then he go through all that encounter go, there were smaller type cases right?
Jacob: Sure yeah.
Timothy: But I can just see me in this group with Jan and that judge, yeah, we’re going to do an encounter group here and we’re going to share personal details with all these people here and with a prosecutor and a judge, and I’m going to be able to keep my cool. Like I don’t think I want an encounter group experience and I don’t want these people knowing anything and I’m not doctor Phil.
Jacob: Oh, because yeah, well you bring up a thing I never thought of because even if you’re like I don’t want to just the attitude of like I don’t want to share any information like. And they would call, well, why sir why are you so quiet. Well, because this is crazy.
Timothy: It’s none of your business.
Jacob: It’s none of my business. This is, I’m not going to spill my guts like I’m on the Doctor Phil show. And then you would be weeded out even not saying anything, you know what I mean? You would just be like this is crazy and then you’d be oh then, we don’t want him because he’s not manipulatable.
Timothy: What they’re creating is group think, and ensuring that that group will work together and to a conclusion for the state.
Jacob: For the state, correct.
Timothy: So, I’m emphasizing in what you said. Anybody that’s independent thinking, anybody that says, look, this is none of your business and I don’t know who these people are. Why would I want to tell them and I’m not here for a group encounter situation to do what you want me to do. So, let me qualify all of that ranting and raving which is absolutely true and I could probably preach this for another hour and where the Christians out here preaching this and warning people when they do jury duty. You know what? How about full disclosure? Okay, judge. Not a problem. I want to know since this is a woman When do you have your period? Are you going through menopause? Are you any other medications? Are you on any enterprises? Have you had any abortions? I want your drug test. Same thing with the prosecutor. Who did you vote for? Who are your friends? Who do you hang with? Are you associating with anybody that’s outside the actual legal profession? Do you enjoy real life with real people suffering under the laws of Washington State? Look, I want full disclosure. Weight gain, weight loss, what you’ve been doing, where you go, what you do for hobbies?
Let’s at least make it fair then I’ll be glad to share my Bible studies, my life, who I associate with, who I don’t. Not only that, how many people are volunteering who their friends are, like I want somebody to communicate who my friends are, or what news I listen to, that you. You have to be massively just have a welcome sign that says manipulate me for the state the minute that they say let’s do a Doctor Phil and Oprah encounter. Right?
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: We’ll still come back to this because that is a crucial turning point in this whole thing. Keep going.
Jacob: What did you think? What were you there for?
Jan: What was, I did not want to be on the jury.
Jacob: Okay yeah.
Jan: But I really had, I had no reason to get out of it.
Jacob: Sure.
Jan: I mean in the past I’d had reasons. I had children or I was working, but I really didn’t have any reasons.
Timothy: Let me interrupt. Jacob, this proves that I don’t run a cult.
Jacob: Why is that?
Timothy: Because she just said that to me and I go what do you mean you got every reason not to go. It’s full of that’s what this whole podcast is about that don’t participate in this corruption, correct?
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: And she’s saying, well, I didn’t have any reason. Jan is far more accommodating for this kind of thing. It’s why God chose her to go to jury duty. You follow what I’m saying.
Jacob: Sure, yeah
Timothy: If I ran a cult, we’d all be thinking the same but we don’t think exactly the same except for the things that are in Jesus Christ.
Jacob: Sure.
Timothy: Yeah, a little subpoint. Go ahead.
Jan: So, I didn’t really necessarily want to be on the jury. Because we are just, I just had actually a bad experience in that courthouse.
Jacob: Yes. And so, they didn’t, just to be clear to They didn’t give you there was nothing ahead of time because you said, they didn’t give you any instructions. So, they didn’t tell you anything. They didn’t, there was no packet on how to be a good juror. There was no outline of what to expect that day walking in.
Jan: Nope. Just go to this room.
Jacob: Okay, nothing. Show up. So, you’re already just being herded around like a cow. You don’t even know where to go.
Timothy: I think cows know where they’re going.
Jan: Right.
Jacob: Okay. Alright. So go ahead.
Jan: Yeah.
Jacob: So, what happens next? You’re in this room.
Jan: Okay. Yeah. Well, then they did start handing out some paperwork.
Jacob: Oh okay.
Jan: And so, they asked you to fill out some personal information, your name, address, that kind of thing. Then, they sent out this paperwork. They wanted you to donate your jury compensation to the new court childcare program.
Timothy: Jacob, hold me back. Hold me back. Did we catch that? They want a donation.
Jacob: They want their money back.
Timothy: They want and they wanted to go for the child wear a fund. It’s always for the children and let me rant and rave them. But let’s get the picture here. You show up for dirty duty. You’re going through this this cow hurting process and you’re giving a stipend of a little bit of money.
Jacob: I don’t know if it’s 10 or 15 bucks a month is what you’re going to get to be a jury.
Timothy: Well, they pay you actually gas. I’ve actually got the little screen clip you can go on their website and there’s two boxes. One you can donate the money to the core children fund.
Jacob: Child Care.
Timothy: Child Care Center. And then you can donate to the Childcare Center, the gas money they pay you. So, it’s two different boxes, two different donations.
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: And on the screenshot the word, yes, like donate is in capital letters. That they clearly that we know that the state Washington just lust for every dollar and that there’s not a tax they don’t just lust for and go after. But again, this is highly manipulative. I have to think this was done intentionally. I know the greed angle is there but by checking those boxes like let’s say you’re a person that goes, oh yeah, I want to donate. What have you just demonstrated to the state? All the prosecutor has to do is look up your name check and that judge and look and go, oh, they donate or they didn’t donate. What did you? Forget all the other questionnaire and the dialogue and a high-sounding legal talk. What did a person just demonstrate by donating or not donating that money?
Jacob: Well, if you donate then you’re easily swayed.
Timothy: That’s right, you’re for the state. It’s always for the children, it’s for the state. It’s for, oh it’s for children. They don’t have check a box to donate to the public defender’s office because they’re underfunded, right?
Jacob: Correct.
Timothy: Because that was the message that what? The public defender’s office is not supported or is supported by the state. I check the box if it went there because public defenders are always underfunded and that’s where prosecutors immediately want you to go so, they bankrupt you. They’re not listing that there or giving you any choice. It’s always for the children and if you check that box, you are loudly declaring I’m for the state and I’m for the state protecting children. That’s what you’re declaring. And if you don’t check the box, what are you declaring? Like, no, I’m not going to do that. I’m not far the state. That would be enough right there as a judge or an evil prosecutor to go I do or do not want them. It spells everything right out front. Question, Jacob.
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: It’s always for the children, isn’t it?
Jacob: Yes, it is.
Timothy: Always for the children.
Jacob: Always for the children.
Timothy: Let me ask you a question. Are the children in Washington State safer? Or worse off since they’ve done all this child prevention stuff and taking money in these causes. Are our children more safe to be raised in a family authority home?
Jacob: Oh, no worse off.
Timothy: To be law abiding, to be at peace, to be content going through hormonal changes or are they luring our children away to be castrated, to be mutilated, to believe in all kind of sexual perversion type things or ideology or that white people are bad? What is really going on here? Are our children actually more safe? So, anybody checking that box is approving of all the junk and the perversion that’s going on that the state of Washington is imposing upon our children. They’re coming in and kidnapping our children if there’s any slight hint or they just make up something. There’s nothing about this that you should check the box and say, yeah, I want the state to have more money for children.
Jacob: Correct.
Timothy: They undermine fathers. Divorce rates are up. Who wins in the most of the time in family court. It’s the woman or it’s the lying or it’s that that’s going on. So, you’re checking the box because these poor women who are in trouble with this state or their husband or whatever receive free child care. I’m assuming that’s what it’s going for.
Jacob: Yeah, it’s probably because I don’t know but yeah, the child care would be you’re a working mom and then someone’s got to watch your kids. So yeah. Oh yeah, but I mean anytime you’re giving a single dollar to the state to be like oh you oh, you should look after my kids. I’m like no. No, I don’t care.
Timothy: They are enemies of our children.
Jacob: Yeah, I’m not why would I ever, I can’t say ever enough ever. Why would I ever want the state looking after my child at all in any capacity?
Timothy: You need proof just look at the condition of Seattle and other places in the drug addiction and goes on down the line really.
Jacob: Yeah. Oh yeah because yeah, they’ve done a great job.
Timothy: Oh yeah.
Jacob: They have a proven track record. We can really change people for the better. You’re right.
Timothy: I wish all these people would have a class action lawsuit and have a refund base number one and even taking it but on the evidence that this did not benefit anybody whatsoever and on any level. When I first talked to Jan after she came back from this, we’re kind of, she’s kind of filling me in right? Not this long discussion. She got to the point of this money thing and my mind just flipped. I go whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. What did you just say? Because she’s not thinking anything about it.
Jacob: Sure.
Timothy: And I’m not disparaging her. She’s not thinking anything about it. I’m going whoa. What did they just do? And then I got fixated on that. We just kept talking about it and eventually well I had to do the interview and we go from there. But this is a game changer point. If you wanted there’s so many corruptions but if you wanted to go well give us one thing that’s aggression right there it is. Right there in front of your face. Donate or don’t donate. We better press on. Just think how, I have so many reforms in my mind that would save money that would be cost effective that would move things along, but it would introduce justice into the system and they’re not going to go for it. Alright, let’s press on.
Jacob: How much do you get compensated? This is, it’s joke pay, right?
Jan: Yeah, it is. It’s like, I think it was like $10 maybe $15 a day.
Jacob: Okay, yeah. Yeah, that’s a joke pay.
Jan: Yeah, that’s all you get, but they want you to donate it.
Jacob: What is the new core child care program as in like what is this?
Jan: I have no idea. I’ve never heard of it. I mean, in fact, right now, we’re trying to get some information on this childcare program.
Jacob: Yeah.
Jan: And to find out, okay, how much money has been donated over the years to this program. Because you most jurors, they don’t want their $10 a day. And so, they’re going to go, okay, sure, fine. I mean, personally, I took my $10 a day.
Jacob: Okay, yeah, yeah. Sure. But they’re hoping. That’s, of course that’s like the government. The taxes already paid for the courthouse and everything in it and then you show up to supposedly and then they still want the tiny bit of money that they’re going to hand in your pocket. That just sounds like the government, right?
Jan: Yeah. Exactly.
Jacob: Okay and they and they called it the child Care program. So, and was this is it just like a check box? Like you just check, hey, my money will go to it. I’m good with that or was it more in depth like you had to sign away or, no it was an easy-peasy, we just take your money.
Jan: You just put a little check in the box either you do or do not and you sign it.
Jacob: But they didn’t explain in any ways what the money was for other than it was for the children. That’s what everybody says right. You’re like if you don’t give to the children, you’re a bad person. Okay, so that’s weird. Alright, so then what else do they ask on these forms?
Jan: Okay, oh well at this point, oh, the other form that they gave you at this point they were just asking your name and address your occupation that kind of thing.
Jacob: Yeah.
Jan: Then they had this, it would they called it an anonymous questionnaire. And they said they were doing a study on jurors, and their mindsets. And so, they wanted you to answer all these questions about your mindset you know.
Timothy: Jacob, did you. Do you believe anything is anonymous? I mean within the government? They’re come along saying, I’m not saying they’re not tracking it but whatever.
Jacob: Well, she was because she’s saying there was a separate piece of paper. So, your personal information isn’t on. It’s a separate one.
Timothy: Sure, again it’s a minor point what they’re really doing is collecting the mindset.
Jacob: Oh yeah. I mean even.
Timothy: Who’s going to support the state who’s not.
Jacob: Well, even I’ll take it at face value that it’s supposedly anonymous but it’s still evil because there’s regardless, I mean Jan Phil hers out and they didn’t know it was Jan. But there, it all goes into a box and then they determine how they can whistle their will into everything.
Timothy: Sure. Or if they need to tweak something in the program to keep certain people away that actually think.
Jacob: Sure.
Timothy: And would bring justice into the jury pool and who the fools that they can attract.
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: It’s a marketing ploy and so you’re trying to market certain people. Whatever. They’re, my occupation. Whatever it’s none of their business kind of routine. Go ahead.
Jacob: Did you answer them?
Jan: Yeah, I answered them.
Jacob: So then, so is it a separate piece of paper? How is this an anonymous?
Jan: Yes.
Jacob: Okay, obvious that’s a separate piece. Not that they can’t match up handwriting if they wanted but anyways that’s a different story. So, and you did fill it out.
Jan: Right. I did fill it out.
Jacob: What kind of questions are they wanting to know? Do you remember?
Jan: Well, I don’t really remember.
Jacob: Okay, you did not recall.
Jan: But I know there were a lot of kind of psychological kind of things like you know what do you think of a courts and you know.
Jacob: Sure.
Jan: I don’t really remember
Timothy: Of course, what do you think of, like I’d have to do you know Jacob? Was it like fill in the blank check box?
Jacob: I don’t know.
Timothy: One to ten like really there’s a whole book. I what do you think of the court? Uh yeah. Can I share that with everybody here?
Jacob: Sure, yeah.
Timothy: Anyway, keep going.
Jacob: Do you remember how long it was? How was this like one piece of paper or you were flipping it?
Jan: It was a couple pages.
Jacob: Couple pages, okay.
Jan: I mean I kind of got the idea. They, it didn’t say this but I got the idea that maybe some college was doing some program on this like gather all this data. We want to do an analysis on jurors and their mindset.
Jacob: Well, I doubt it’s the college. It’s more like the government. The government wants to know everything.
Timothy: Let me tweak what you just said there Jacob because and I’ll just sort out for this you’re wrong. They’re it’s true. The government wants to know but they’re hiring the college students, the paralegals, all the do gooders that work for the children’s court or framing lies that the prosecution can bring in. They’re getting all that information and so they have a vast wealth of knowledge and how to manipulate people. Not just there but also in the jury, especially in the jury pool that’s the whole goal here of all of this. And then of course, as you find the state of Washington dumbing down the public education system, it gets easy and easy to find fools, doesn’t it?
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: Alright, press on. Any comments on that.
Jacob: No.
Timothy: Okay.
Jacob: I doubt it was a college. Pretty sure it was them. What? So, what happens next? No, go ahead. Okay what? What?
Jan: Okay.
Jacob: I can’t help myself. I can’t help myself to like to the whole judicial system is so corrupt to think it was a supposed college people anyways. Go ahead. What?
Jan: Okay, so then you just wait, wait, wait until your name is called. So finally, I was in to go to a courtroom.
Jacob: Okay, so wait so you’re in I’m just because I’ve never been in one of these rooms. This is a big room? Would you call this a big room?
Jan: Yeah, I would.
Jacob: And there’s and how so how many people are in the room you figure?
Jan: I would say couple hundred.
Jacob: What? No. Really?
Jan: Yeah.
Jacob: Oh, I didn’t know. I didn’t know. Okay, so there’s a big room. There’s a couple hundred and the whole time it’s the chaotic setting. Even while you’re filling out your paperwork?
Jan: Well, I mean there’s some worker.
Jacob: Sure.
Jan: I mean people are sitting there and you’re passing these papers down this aisle where you’re sitting. It’s like okay take one pass it on, take one pass it on.
Jacob: Who comes in the room? Did do they say like hey my name is so and so I’m a something, something?
Jan: Yes, they did have someone come in and explain a few things. They did have like this I guess a teleprompter or something going on in the corner that was explaining some things just please wait. So, I guess I guess now that I think about there were that instructions you could read up there. Okay, please just wait till your name is called, be patient
Timothy: Okay, hang on just a second there, Jacob. And do you wanna expound on that. I find it interesting that you really focus in on the fact that this is chaotic. Is there, what is it about that that kind of sticks under your crawl? Are you just commenting on the fact?
Jacob: I’m just trying to get, if you’re asking me what was my interview style. I was just trying to get as much detail as possible.
Timothy: Sure, I gotcha and I hear you it’s chaotic. It’s interesting saying yeah there was a teleprompt with some instructions right. It wasn’t instructions about the Bill of Rights, the Constitution, you don’t want to come to wrong decision. This is what the word evidence means. They’re going to keep these people’s dumb as possible. So, you create this cretic mindset going on and then you find out who you can manipulate the best.
Jacob: Sure.
Timothy: Keep going.
Jan: and be courteous that kind of thing.
Jacob: And so, you’re sitting there how long did they make you wait before your name is called?
And you know be courteous that kind of thing. And so, you’re sitting there. How long did they make you wait before your name is called?
Timothy: Okay. Sorry to interrupt again. We forgot to pause. Jacob if you got to tell a group of people to be caught courteous. They don’t need to be surfing on a jury pool.
Jacob: Sure. Yeah.
Timothy: Go ahead.
Jan: Wow. Let’s see. I think I was in there may be about 30 minutes.
Jacob: Okay. 30 minutes. Okay. So, then what happens?
Jan: Okay, so then your name is called and then you go up to this desk. You get a number. Everybody has assigned like a certain number and then you’re instructed to go to a courtroom.
Jacob: Okay.
Jan: So, I was given my number and then I was instructed to go to Judge Gain’s courtroom on the fourth floor. And so, I went up there, Judge Brian Gain. It was his courtroom. And so, we went up to his courtroom and again there’s 50 of us. It’s just it was a very small courtroom. And I wondered how are we all going to get in there.
Jacob: Sure.
Jan: So, people went in and they all sat down and of course there wasn’t enough room and then the judge said, okay well, everybody just go up to the jury box that are left that are still looking for seats. So, we went up and kind of I was one of the ones that went up to the jury box. And then at that point they told us some things about the case.
Jacob: Okay.
Jan: And so, this particular case was a state of Washington versus Bernard Bella Roach.
Timothy: Jacob, let’s pause here at the moment. She’s going to start getting into the actual case here. We’ve kind of gone a little bit long introducing this. So much injustice, so little time. You’d think there’s a holy guy going to come back and just burn all down and start over. Go ahead and play something if you’re going to jury duty and showing up you could take this with you. Go for it, Jacob.
Video: Jury duty goads. Goad 1, if it’s not illegal, prosecutors need to shut up. Goad 2, plea bargains are the final word. Just say no to extortion. “Yes, is yes, no is no. Anything beyond is from the devil.” (Matthew 5:37). Goat 3. If liars for the prosecution are not punished. Judges are wicked. “If a ruler listens to lies, all his officials become wicked.” (Proverbs 29:12_. Let us consider Jury Duty on The Consider Podcast. The Consider Podcast. www.consider.info, where the rubber meets a road.
Timothy: I’m afraid society is like the frogs in a frying pan. Have you ever heard that analogy before it’s kind of a true thing Jacob?
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: For those that haven’t, you put a frog in a frying pan and you slowly turn the heat up. The frog won’t jump out because it just gets used to it. We’re so used to the corruption that goes on. We don’t even think about it or it has to be so bad before you wake up. Just think of the reform that would happen when the first thing mentioned. I didn’t throw a scripture on it. We’ll do it later but if the prosecution is prosecuting that which is illegal, they shouldn’t be allowed to bring up anything that is legal. I mean, that’s just logical. That’s just reasonable. That’s fundamental law that if they’re going to accuse you of a crime, then, it can only be specifically about that crime, not tattoos, not your religion, not your skin color, not how the family feels wounded, or how people are hurting. Only that which is actually illegal should be brought in.
Just think trials would move forward. Of course, prosecution have a hard time bankrupting you so that you could actually put up a defense. It would narrow the focus what police do. This hate crime nonsense would just go away. I won’t go sidetrack. You get my point on that one, right?
Jacob: Yeah.
Timothy: That’s just reasonable. It to bring in all these emotions and these other things that these prosecutors bring in and you show up for jury duty and that doesn’t affect you, then you deserve to be on jury. That’s I got to say. You’re so dumb and stupid and such an unrepentant fool and by the way, when I use fool and dumb and stupid, I’m talking about a foolishness and a stupidity and a dumbness that you can repent of, not looking down on somebody. I was born a fool and God has had to crucify me and change me so that I’m no longer a fool. But if you walk into a courtroom and that prosecutor and the judge is allowing anything, anything into that courtroom that is not specifically illegal, I personally no matter what the crime is would vote for. I don’t know how you want to word it.
Come to the conclusion. I’m not guilty I’m not supporting a system that is so far corrupt for which they refuse to change they just go underground more and more. Can’t do it. I’m not going to lose my soul and my relation with God by participating in something that is so vile and sinister and corrupt. The other things that go on, we’ll go back to that later let your yes be yes. Look, if prosecutors to say, look, if you take this plea deal, let’s say it’s four-year plea deal, right? Then, that’s all that crime is worth. They shouldn’t be allowed to extort and that’s what it is to come in and go, well, if you don’t take our plea deal, then we’re going to go back to life imprisoned in the electric chair and to be tortured in Guatemala Bay and so on and so forth. Your yes is yes, your no is no.
If you think it’s worthy enough to go to somebody and go, here’s the plea bargain agreement, you can take it or not, the prosecution should not be allowed to move on to anything else. Really should be the prosecution comes in with the plea bargain. The person goes, okay, I’ll accept the plea bargain or I’ll go for a trial based on the plea bargain. That’s a right, that’s a privilege, that’s fundamental. Anything else deviating from that is absolutely not only is it corruption, not only is it unlawful, not only is it unconstitutional, not only is it immoral, not only is it a violation of the Bill of Rights, it’s also the damnation of prosecutor souls and the damnation of the soul of judges. Jesus says in Matthew 5:37, “Simply let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes’ and your ‘No’ be ‘No’, anything beyond this comes from the evil one.” They’re being inspired right. Their God is their stomach. Their glory is their shame, because why? They worship their belly. Jacob, take us out of here.
Closing: This has been the Consider Podcast with your hosts Timothy and Jacob where the whole gospel message has been used to examine today’s wisdom, folly, and madness. For more information, drop by www.consider.info. The Consider Podcast, examining today’s wisdom, folly, and madness with the whole gospel.
1Disclaimer
The Consider Podcast attempts to express opinions through God’s holiness. Nothing concerning justice or injustice should be taken as legal advice or a call to action. There is no political agenda. There is no individual moral life advice. Indeed, each person is solely responsible before God and man for their actions or inactions. The Consider Podcast is narrowly focused on one thing, and only one thing – the need for all to surrender to a life of repentance according to the whole gospel.
The Consider Podcast
Examining today’s wisdom, folly and madness with the whole gospel.
www.consider.info
- Hate Crime: Carla Speaks - 04/30/2024
- #71, Jury Manipulation, 2nd Admendment, Wrap-Up - 04/29/2024
- #70, Jury Manipulation, pt 3 - 04/29/2024
