<html>
<body>
<font size=3>From: Break Chains <breakthechains02@yahoo.com>
<br><br>
</font><font face="arial" size=3>For immediate Release: 4/22/04<br><br>
<u>UNCONSTITUTIONAL GRAND JURY TO TAKE PLACE TODAY<br><br>
</u>Does anybody remember the federal investigational charade that took
place back in 2001-02 to investigate a 30 SUV arson that took place at
Romania Chevrolet in April 2001? Five members of the Eugene community
were originally subpoenaed to appear in front of a Federal Grand Jury and
after month’s harassment, surveillance, and numerously rescheduling of
the hearings, only two people actually ended up testifying in front of
the jury. <br><br>
On March 6, 2004, Carla Martinez (one of the prior subpoenaed witnesses
that never actually testified), was once again subpoenaed to a newly
instated Federal Grand Jury. The current jury is only about four months
old and will be serving for a total of eighteen months. Carla Martinez
appeared in front of the jury on March 18, 2004. Now three other Oregon
residents have been subpoenaed to appear in front of the jury today,
April 22; the proceedings will begin at 8:30a.m. and continue throughout
the day. Once again they are investigating the Romania 2001
fire.<br><br>
Regardless of your opinion on this case, if you believe in your
constitutional rights, you should be opposed to Grand Juries. Grand
Juries are a tool of oppression that is used to intimidate organizations,
communities and individual people. Grand Juries were established in
England in 1166 in order to employ locals as an investigative tool of the
king. At this time the grand jurors were drawn from the actual
neighborhood to report on things they knew firsthand or had heard.
Although they have changed in form, modern day Grand Juries still
function the same way in that they are designed to serve the government.
After centuries of unjust interrogations, England formally abolished
Grand Juries on September 1, 1993, with public support on the basis that
they were costly and highly inefficient. Unfortunately, the US has
not made the same decision. <br><br>
Many have criticized Grand Juries as being unconstitutional because a
witness may not have a lawyer present in the room during the proceedings
and the judge (not present in the court room) has the right to take away
your Fifth Amendment rights (the right to not comment) with the threat of
jail held over the witness's head. If a witness pleads the Fifth
Amendment and a U.S. District Court judge then tells the witness they
must testify and they refuse, you can be jailed up to 18 months or the
remaining term of the jury (which ever comes first), for contempt of
court in an attempt to get you to testify. This is said to be coercive
not punitive (punishment) in the eyes of the law. Today, in the United
States, they are often referred to as fishing expeditions. It is
namely the prosecution and the FBI, scraping at a community trying to get
enough tiny pieces of information just to prove they have a case.
Many in the United States are against Grand Juries not only due to their
overt expense and tedious inefficiency, but because they rob American
people of their basic civil liberties. Unfortunately, most people are not
aware that this process exists unless they are going through it, which is
why it is so important that we all start talking about them and speaking
out against them. <br><br>
If you would like more information, please call 343-8548<br><br>
<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#FF0000">The Freedom Archives<br>
522 Valencia Street<br>
San Francisco, CA 94110<br>
(415) 863-9977<br>
</font><font size=3><a href="http://www.freedomarchives.org/" eudora="autourl">www.freedomarchives.org</a></font></body>
</html>