J.A.I.L. News
Journal ______________________________________________________ Los
Angeles,
California December
14, 2005 ______________________________________________________ www.SouthDakotaJudicialAccountability.org
North
Carolina's Court
System Falling Apart
(By Ron Branson - National J.A.I.L.
CIC)
I am sure that it will not shock you to hear that the
Court system in North Carolina is falling apart -- this, despite years of
legislative effort to prop it up. In the meantime, we are told that there is a
growing public discontent with their judicial system.
Gee! With an "Independent" judiciary that is fully covered
by judicial immunity, how could such a thing as this happen? How can such
a disaster as this be cured? Perhaps by hiring more judges and giving
them all a pay raise things can be turned around resulting in judicial
integrity.
Am I sounding crazy here? Of course I am being sarcastic,
but I just wanted to get across my point of the ridiculousness of the
remedies currently being considered by the North Carolina state
legislators looking for a cure. After you read the following news article,
I will give all of you, and the legislators of North Carolina, some free
advice as to the real remedy. - Ron Branson
Bold, new vision needed for North Carolina's judicial system
From five-term Mecklenburg County District Court Judge Bill
Constangy:
There is growing public discontent with the current N.C. judicial system,
drawn from real-life bad experiences dealing with a system that too often
resembles the convoluted entrails of England's Chancery Court of 1853, as
painstakingly depicted in Charles Dickens' "Bleak House."
Improvement of our court system should be a bipartisan issue. Almost a decade
has passed since the Futures Commission proposed a detailed plan to revitalize
the system to meet current needs (at that time). Slow, minuscule steps have
seeped out of the legislature instead of the giant leaps needed. The meager
continued funding of our third branch of government, with less than 3 percent of
our state budget, reveals the lack of priority and focus that the legislature
devotes to the judicial system.
Money is only one prong of the solution. A fundamental structural overhaul of
the system itself is essential.
Our court system operates under an old model that better served a less
urbanized state in an earlier time. The following steps would begin to bring the
system into the 21st century:
� Immediately establish a statewide family
court to provide the services desperately needed for families in crisis. This
was recommended long ago by the Futures Commission. Experimental programs have
sprouted across the state with successful results. The time-consuming delay of
adopting a constitutional amendment to create a new court could be avoided by
establishing the Family Court as a separate division of Superior Court, as has
been done in Georgia.
� Expand the duties of magistrates to assume
many of the time-consuming functions of trial court judges such as child support
enforcement and civil domestic violence restraining orders. This would free up
judges to handle more extensive trial matters expeditiously.
� Eliminate the right to double dipping
trials, which provide more than one shot at the apple -- more than one trial of
the same issue. For example, magistrate cases are appealable for trial de novo
by District Court judges, and drunken driving cases are appealable to Superior
Court judges for a second trial. Having two trials of the same case is wasteful
of funds and time.
� Establish a "plain English jury instruction
project" to revise all pattern jury instructions and eliminate the arcane
language of present instructions, which leave jurors' eyes glazed over with lack
of understanding and guidance about applying the law and reaching a proper
verdict.
� Adequately fund and staff the court system,
not only with enough judges and prosecutors but with proper support staff
including law clerks, psychological evaluation resources and secretarial
assistance. The disparity in state court salaries and appropriate range of
compensation is exemplified by the fact that the lowest federal judge, a federal
magistrate judge, is paid substantially more than our state's highest judge, the
chief justice of the state Supreme Court.
North Carolina's tradition as being a beacon of progress in the New South
requires a judicial system worthy of such aspirations. Fiscal responsibility and
progressive reform are not inconsistent. The legislature can seize the
initiative to strengthen our judicial system. A spirit of thoughtful innovation
and progressive action can quickly move North Carolina into a position of
national leadership in providing a model judicial system to meet the needs of
its citizens.
The Real Remedy For North Carolina - by Ron
Branson
Fortunately North Carolina is an Initiative state, meaning
that the People of N.C. can pass their own constitutional amendment to create
the remedy suitable to themselves, and not wait on the legislature to formulate
their so-called "remedy," which will not be a remedy, but merely more
politicking.
The only remedy for North Carolina's failing judiciary is
already a matter of record, and has been for the past five years. It
is the North Carolina J.A.I.L. Initiative, but perhaps it is too
effective for the problems of the N.C. court system. Nonetheless, I again
presenting it for all to see. It is as follows:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Judicial Accountability Initiative Law (J.A.I.L.)
(a)
Preamble. We, the People of North Carolina, find that the doctrine of judicial
immunity has been greatly abused; and when judges abuse their power, the people
are obliged - it is their duty - to correct that injury, for the benefit of
themselves and their posterity. In order to ensure judicial accountability and
domestic tranquility, we hereby amend Article I of our Constitution to add these
provisions, which shall be known as "The Judicial Accountability
Amendment."
(b) Definitions. For purposes of this
amendment:
1. The term "blocking" shall mean any act that impedes the lawful
conclusion of a case, to include unreasonable delay and willful rendering of a
void judgment or order.
2. The term "judge" shall mean justice, judge, magistrate,
commissioner, judge pro tem, private judge, judicial mediator, arbitrator and
referee, and every person shielded by judicial
immunity.
3. The term "Juror" shall mean a Special Grand
Juror.
4. The term "seat" shall mean a situs and facility that is
suitable for usage by the Jury.
5. The term "strike" shall mean an adverse immunity
decision.
Where appropriate, the singular shall include the
plural.
(c) Immunity.
Notwithstanding common law or any other provision to the contrary, no immunities
shall be extended to any judge of this State except as is specifically set forth
in this Amendment. Preserving the purpose of protecting judges from frivolous
and harassing actions, no immunity shielding a judge shall be construed to
extend to any deliberate violation of law, fraud or conspiracy, intentional
violation of due process of law, deliberate disregard of material facts,
judicial acts without jurisdiction, blocking of a lawful conclusion of a case,
or any deliberate violation of the Constitutions of North Carolina or the United
States.
(d) Special Grand
Juries. There are hereby created within this State two twenty-five member
Special Grand Juries with statewide jurisdiction having power to judge both law
and fact. This body shall exist independent of statutes governing county Grand
Juries. Their responsibility shall be limited
to deter-mining, on an objective standard, whether a civil suit against a judge
would be frivolous and harassing, or fall within the exclusions of immunity as
set forth herein, and whether there is probable cause of criminal conduct by the
judge complained of.
(e) Professional
Counsel. Each Special Grand Jury shall have exclusive power to retain
non-governmental advisors, special prosecutors, and investigators, as needed,
who shall serve no longer than one year, after which term said officers shall be
ineligible. Notwithstanding the one year, a special prosecutor may be retained
to prosecute current cases in which they are involved through all appeals and
any complaints for judicial misconduct.
(f) Establishment of
Special Grand Jury Seats. Within ninety days following the ratification of this
Amendment, the Legislature shall provide a seat for each Special Grand Jury. No
seat shall be located within a mile of any judicial body, and each seat shall be
reasonably placed proportionately according to population throughout the State.
Should the Legislature fail to so act within ninety days, its members shall
permanently forfeit their salaries and per diem pay, beginning on the
ninety-first day, until such time that it abides by the terms of this (f)
section.
(g) Annual Funding.
The Legislature shall cause to be deducted two and nine-tenths percent from the
gross judicial salaries of all judges, which amount shall be deposited regularly
into the exclusive trust account created by this Amendment in paragraph (k) for
its operational expenses, together with filing fees under paragraph (h),
surcharges under paragraph (i), forfeited benefits of disciplined judges under
paragraph (q), and fines imposed under paragraph
(r).
(h) Filing Fees.
Attorneys filing a civil complaint or answer before the Special Grand Jury in
behalf of their client, shall at the time of filing, pay a fee equal to the
filing fee due in a civil appeal to the State Supreme Court. Individuals filing
a civil complaint or answer before the Special Grand Jury in their own behalf as
a matter of right, shall, at the time of filing, post a fee of fifty dollars, or
file a declaration, which shall remain confidential, stating they are
impoverished and unable to pay and/or object to such
fee.
(i) Surcharges.
Should this Amendment lack sufficient funding through its fines, fees, and
forfeitures (including deductions in paragraph (g)), the Legislature shall
impose appropriate surcharges upon the civil court filing fees of corporate
litigants as necessary to make this Amendment
self-supporting.
(j) Compensation of
Jurors. Each Juror shall receive a salary commensurate to a Superior Court
judge prorated according to the number of days
actually served.
(k) Annual Budget.
The Special Grand Juries shall have an annual operational budget commensurate to
double the combined salaries of the fifty Jurors
serving full time, which sum shall be initially deposited by the Legislature
into an exclusive trust account to be annually administered by the State
Controller. Should the trust balance, within any budget year, drop to less than
an amount equivalent to the annual gross salaries of thirty Superior
Court judges, the State Controller shall so
notify the Legislature which shall replenish the account, prorated based on the
actual average expenditures during the budget year. Should the trust balance in
any subsequent year exceed the annual operational budget at the beginning of a
new budget year, the State Controller shall return such excess to the state
treasury.
(l) Jurisdiction.
Each Special Grand Jury shall
have exclusive power to establish rules assuring their attendance, to provide
internal discipline, and to remove any of its members on grounds of misconduct.
The Special Grand Jury shall immediately assign a docket number to each
complaint brought before it, unless such case is transferred to another Special
Grand Jury to achieve caseload balance. A transfer shall not prejudice a
docketing deadline. The Special Grand Jury first docketing a complaint shall
have sole jurisdiction of the case. Except as provided in paragraphs (s) and
(w), no complaint of misconduct shall be considered by any Special Grand Jury
unless the complainant shall have first attempted to exhaust all judicial
remedies available in this State within the immediately preceding six-month
period. (Such six-month period, however, shall not commence in complaints of
prior fraud or blocking of a lawful conclusion until after the date the Special
Grand Juries become functional. This provision applies remedially and
retroactively.) Should the complainant opt to proceed to the United States
Supreme Court, such six-month period shall commence upon the disposition by that
court.
(m) Qualifications of
Jurors. A Juror shall have attained to the age of thirty years, and have been
nine years a citizen of the United States, and have been an inhabitant of North
Carolina for two years immediately prior to having his/her name drawn. Those not
eligible for Special Grand Jury service shall include elected and appointed
officials, members of the State Bar, judges (active or retired), judicial,
prosecutorial and law enforcement personnel, without other exclusion except
previous adjudication ofmental
incapacity, imprisonment, or parole from a conviction of a felonious crime
against persons.
(n) Selection of
Jurors. The Jurors shall serve without compulsion and shall be drawn by public
lot by the Secretary of State from names on the voters rolls and any citizen
submitting his/her name to the Secretary of State for such
drawing.
(o) Service of
Jurors. Excluding the establishment of the initial Special Grand Juries, each
Juror shall serve one year. No Juror shall serve more than once. On the first
day of each month, two persons shall be rotated off each Special Grand Jury and
new Citizens seated, except in January it shall be three. Vacancies shall be
filled on the first of the following month in addition to the Jurors regularly
rotated, and the Juror drawn to fill a vacancy shall complete only the remainder
of the term of the Juror replaced. A majority of thirteen shall determine any
matter. Special Grand Jury files shall always remain public record following
their final determination.
(p) Procedures. The
Special Grand Jury shall serve a copy of the filed complaint upon the subject
judge and notice to the complainant of such service. The judge shall have twenty
days to serve and file an answer. The complainant shall have fifteen days to
reply to the judge's answer. (Upon timely request, the Special Grand Jury may
provide for extensions for good cause.) In criminal matters, the Special Grand
Jury shall have power to subpoena witnesses, documents, and other tangible
evidence, and to examine witnesses under oath. Each Special Grand Jury shall
determine the causes properly before it with their reasoned findings in writing
within one hundred twenty (120) calendar days, serving on all parties their
decision on whether immunity shall be barred as a defense to any civil action
that may thereafter be pursued against the judge. A rehearing may be requested
of the Special Grand Jury within fifteen days with service upon the opposition.
Fifteen days shall be allowed to reply thereto. Thereafter, the Special Grand
Jury shall render final determination within thirty days. All allegations of the
complaint shall be liberally construed in favor of the complainant. The Jurors
shall keep in mind, in making their decisions, that they are entrusted by the
People of this State with the duty of restoring a perception of justice and
accountability of the judiciary, and are not to be swayed by artful presentation
by the judge. They shall avoid all influence by judicial and government
entities. The statute of limitations on any civil suit brought pursuant to this
Amendment against a State judge shall not commence until the rendering of a
final decision by the Special Grand Jury.
(q) Removal. Whenever
any judge has received three strikes, the judge shall be permanently removed
from office, and thereafter shall not serve in any State judicial office,
including that of private judge. Judicial retirement for such removed judge
shall not exceed one-half of the benefits to which such person would have
otherwise been entitled. Retirement shall not avert third strike
penalties.
(r) Indictment.
Should the Special Grand Jury also find probable cause of criminal conduct on
the part of any judge against whom a complaint is docketed, it shall have the
power to indict such judge except where double jeopardy attaches. The Special
Grand Jury shall, without voir dire
beyond personal impartiality, relationship, or linguistics, cause to be
impaneled twelve special trial jurors, plus alternates, which trial jurors shall
be instructed that they have power to judge both law and fact. The Special Grand
Jury shall also select a non-governmental special prosecutor and a judge with no
more than four years on the bench from a county other than that of the defendant
judge. The trial jury shall be selected from the same pool of jury candidates as
any regular jury. The special prosecutor shall thereafter prosecute the cause to
a conclusion, having all the powers of any other prosecutor within this State.
Upon conviction, the special trial jury shall have exclusive power of sentencing
(limited to incarceration, fines and/or community service), which shall be
derived by an average of the sentences of the trial
jurors.
(s) Criminal
Procedures. In addition to any other provisions of this Amendment, a complaint
for criminal conduct of a judge may be brought directly to the Special Grand
Jury upon all the following prerequisites: (1) an affidavit of criminal conduct
has been lodged with the appropriate prosecutorial entity within ninety (90)
days of the commission of the alleged conduct; (2) the prosecutor declines to
prosecute, or one hundred twenty (120) days has passed following the lodging of
such affidavit and prosecution has not commenced; (3) an indictment, if sought,
has not been specifically declined on the merits bya county Grand Jury; and
(4) the criminal statute of limitations has not run. Any criminal
conviction (including a plea bargain) under any judicial process shall
constitute a strike.
(t) Public
Indemnification. No judge complained of, or sued civilly by a complainant
pursuant to this Amendment, shall be defended at public expense or by any
elected or appointed public counsel, nor shall any judge be reimbursed from
public funds for any losses sustained under this
Amendment.
(u) Enforcement. No
person exercising strict enforcement of the findings of a Special Grand Jury
shall be held liable civilly, criminally, or in
contempt.
(v) Redress. The
provisions of this Amendment are in addition to other redress that may exist and
are not mutually exclusive.
(w) Challenges. No
judge under the jurisdiction of the Special Grand Jury, or potentially affected
by the outcome of a challenge hereto, shall have any jurisdiction to sit in
judgment of such challenge. Such pretended adjudication shall be null and void
for all purposes and a complaint for such misconduct may be brought at any time,
without charge, before the Special Grand Jury by class-action, or by any
adversely affected person.
(x) Preeminence.
Preeminence shall be given to this
Amendment in any case of conflicts with statute, case law, common law, or
constitutional provision. The foreperson of each Special Grand Jury shall read,
or cause to be read, this Amendment to the respective Jurors semi-annually
during the first week of business in January and July. Should any part of this
Amendment be determined unconstitutional, the remainder shall remain in full
force and effect as though no challenge thereto existed.