Many stories of appeared recently on incidences of juror identity theft. Even the U.S. Military has chimed in on the issue. The way the scam works is described in one article:

"The scammer calls claiming to work for the local court and claims you've failed to report for jury duty. He tells you that a warrant has been issued for your arrest.The victim will often rightly claim they never received the jury duty notification. The scammer then asks the victim for confidential information for "verification" purposes.Specifically, the scammer asks for the victim's Social Security number, birth date, and sometimes even for credit card numbers and other private information -- exactly what the scammer needs to commit identity theft.So far, this jury duty scam has been reported in Michigan, Ohio, Texas, Arizona, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Oregon and Washington state. " (There are recent reports of the scam being utilized in Alabama, as well.)

Apparently, the scam began being used by February, 2004; since then, it has rapidly spread around the country.

Apparently, these scams are all too real. The FBI has gotten involved in publicizing the scams. Even Snopes.com, the pre-eminent urban legend busters, have announced that this scam is real, with an unknown potential for financial harm. It is, by all accounts, widespread and growing.

What Jurygeek finds most interesting is that Snopes described this as a "social engineering" scam: "a technique which preys upon people's unquestioning acceptance of authority and willingness to cooperate in order to extract from them sensitive information."

My, my. This sounds strangely similar to something Jurygeek noted back in June: that the tendency of people to obey authority allows them to be too easily manipulated. While in that post, Jurygeek was referring to the tendency of jurors to be too willing to vote against their own conscientious judgment in order to satisfy or appease authority figures, in the jury duty scam, people are being asked to comply with the request of a (feigned) authority figure.

When someone saying they are about to issue a warrant for your arrest calls, people tend to respond out of anxiety and a wish to appease the threatening authority figure. What is needed to protect ourselves from these sorts of scams, as well as to protect ourselves from manipulation as jurors, appears to be a cultural paradigm shift, away from the obedience to authority and in favor of exercising individual judgment.

One can hardly envision such a paradigm shift in our educational system: what public school teacher is going to begin class by saying "I want you to question and challenge everything I tell you"? (While I try to instill this value in my own child; my wife has resorted to pulling hair - mine!) Yet so long as we treat reflexive obedience to authority as a positive, rather than a negative, trait, we are subject to malevolent manipulation - whether by judges, prosecutors -- or scammers.

posted by Clay S. Conrad @ 10/07/2022   0 comments   

---

To:  New Hampshire JAILers

From: Dick Marple

To: [email protected]

Sent: Friday, October 07, 2022 10:20 AM

Subject: RE: Why aren't the New Hampshire people acting on their right to reform government?

 

Barbie...

Your final question is my question,  Why aren't the New Hampshire people acting on this right?? "

As for "initiative, this is already in Article 32 of our "Bill of Rights"

[Art.] 32. [Rights of Assembly, Instruction, and Petition.] The people have a right, in an orderly and peaceable manner, to assemble and consult upon the common good, give instructions to their representatives, and to request of the legislative body, by way of petition or remonstrance, redress of the wrongs done them, and of the grievances they suffer.

June 1784   

and as has been ignored by the people for over 200 years ?  What I find perplexing to me is, the people have the power but are intimidated by FEAR ! This is a unfounded FEAR that I have no way of competing with such emotional bent. It is reduced to:

                              F=false

                                  E=expectations

                                      A=appearing

                                           R=real

and if this doesn't say it all, then I don't know what does.

Sincerely, Dick Marple, General Court, Representative Merrimack District #9

P.S. I will be "off-line" for a couple of weeks, for surgery to remove a cancer in my large intestine. Hopefully it will be successful.

---

From: <[email protected]>
To: "To JAILers World-Wide" <[email protected]>,"Dick Marple" <[email protected]>
Subject: Why aren't the New Hampshire people acting on their right to reform government?
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2022 12:18:05 -0700

To:  Dick Marple, New Hampshire Representative

Good morning Dick:

(and to all the JAILers)

Subject:  Why aren't the people of New Hampshire acting on their right to reform government? (We need answers)

 

Thanks for your patience. Our load isn't getting any lighter-- in fact, now with South Dakota going strong, it has picked up considerably, which in one sense is good news. Judging from all the opposition being published in S.D. newspapers, J.A.I.L. is finally being taken seriously and we're happy to say that all the naysaying is done merely by propaganda and false statements about J.A.I.L. --no credibility whatsoever! It gives us a chance to respond to it and point out the deliberate deception that is going on. The more the opposition resorts to that kind of tactic, the more fools they make of themselves. They're not able to oppose J.A.I.L. on its true merits!

 

Anyway, your email below is quite interesting-- enough so that I am putting this out to all JAILers. I sent you a copy of an email I wrote to the New Hampshire JAILers, or perhaps just to Lois Gardner (previous JIC), in which I discuss that NH provision. I compared it with the California and the South Dakota provisions authorizing the Initiative, and I don't really see any difference.

 

I'll restate the New Hampshire provision here:

[Art.] 10. [Right of Revolution.] Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.

June 2, 1784 

Here is the California provision:

[Art.II, �1] [Purpose of government] All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for their protection, security, and benefit, and they have the right to alter or reform it when the public good may require. [Former Section 26 of Article I, as renumbered June 8, 2022]

And here is the South Dakota provision:

[Art. VI �26] [Power inherent in people - Alteration in form of government - Inseparable part of Union]

All political power is inherent in the people, and all free government is founded on their authority, and is instituted for their equal protection and benefit, and they have the right in lawful and constituted methods to alter or reform their forms of government in such manner as they may think proper. And the state of South Dakota is an inseparable part of the American Union and the Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land. [No date given]

 

California acknowledges in a separate section the Supreme Law:

[Art. III �1] [United States Constitution Supreme Law]

The State of California is an inseparable part of the United States of America, and the United States Constitution is the supreme law of the land. [New section adopted November 7, 2022]

 

California and South Dakota are initiative states-- New Hampshire supposedly isn't. Take a look at the above constitutional provisions of the three states. Aren't they substantially the same?

 

New Hampshire calls it a "Right of Revolution."  It provides basically the same thing that the other two states provide which is what authorizes the initiative process, i.e., People have the right to alter or reform their government as they deem necessary. The means by which the people exercise that right is by initiative-- i.e., petition.

 

My question is, why wouldn't New Hampshire have the same means to exercise the "Right of Revolution" as they call it? Altering or reforming government (such as what J.A.I.L. will do) is a type of revolution. Isn't that New Hampshire provision the same as an initiative provision by the people?

 

When NH provides that: therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government, doesn't that mean that the people may "and of right ought to" act independently of the legislature? Certainly if "the ends of government are perverted" (meaning contrary to the Constitution), then why would the people depend on that "perverted government" to reform it? That doesn't make sense to me!

 

Dick, you say "If the people will NOT exercise their CURRENT RESERVED RIGHTS, why put more fuzzy-feel-good nonsense on the books that will be ignored as is the current option?????????  Help me to understand." For the benefit of our JAILers who don't know, you are either a current New Hampshire State Representative, or a former one, who recognizes the corruption of government (including the judiciary) and is interested in solving the problem. You and I have been in communication quite often over the last year or two, am I correct? I am told that you have even attended J.A.I.L. meetings in NH, for which we sincerely thank you.

 

In your above question Dick, I'm not sure what you mean by "the current option." It can't be J.A.I.L., because the "current reserved right" is the right to reform government, while J.A.I.L. is the specific means of reforming government. Probably a clearer way to pose your question would be: Why put a measure to reform government (J.A.I.L.) on the books by legislation if the people won't exercise a reserved right to reform government themselves, without the need for legislation?  Is that what you're saying Dick?  It is certainly a question that I ask.

 

That's a great question: Why aren't the people exercising that right? And I think it must be examined, and soon. This country is getting to the end of its rope and the People have to act now!  If the People don't act, they deserve the fate they will receive and have been subject to for more than 200 years. J.A.I.L.'s been out there on the internet since late 1999 (about six years), so the People are informed of the solution to the tyranny. Like the saying goes, "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink." We can lead the people to the solution, but we can't make them act on it.

 

If the New Hampshire people have that right, acknowledged in writing by the state, what other way to exercise it than by petition, like the initiative? The right is settled-- now it has to be determined HOW the right will be exercised. It can't just be ignored by the People-- shame on them!  What am I missing here? (and don't say "brains"). Why aren't the New Hampshire people acting on this right??

 

Thanks Dick for bringing this to my attention. Hopefully we'll be able to get some answers.

 

God bless,

-Barbie-

[email protected]

 

---

----- Original Message -----

From: Dick Marple

To: [email protected]

Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 12:15 PM

Subject: How does one encourage people to exercise their rights?

Barbie....

How does one encourage, all that have eyes to see and ears to hear, to EXERCISE THEIR RIGHTS ?

New Hampshire is the ONLY government that has a reserved RIGHT of the people to:

[Art.] 10. [Right of Revolution.] Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.

June 2, 1784 

If the people will NOT exercise their CURRENT RESERVED RIGHTS, why put more fuzzy-feel-good nonsense on the books that will be ignored as is the current option?????????

Help me to understand....Sincerely, Dick Marple
 

---