(Back to Home)


J.A.I.L. News Journal
Los Angeles, California                March 5, 2006
The Inherent Right of ALL People to Alter or Reform Their Government.
The Right Upon Which All Other Rights Depend.

Rogue Miscreant Legislators
Who is Innocent and Not Conflicted?
The day before yesterday, March 3, 2006, we published a J.A.I.L. News Journal entitled, "Rogue Miscreant Cops," the Los Angeles Times newspaper article by Scott Glover being entitled, "3 More Arrested in Rogue Cop Robberies."
Having read the first five paragraphs of this article, it dawned upon us that all one had to do was substitute all 105 Legislators in South Dakota for the criminals cops in paragraphs four and five, and all fits very well.
To refresh your memory of the context of the first five paragraphs of that article, we reprint it word for word in the next paragraph, just as written, followed by an adaptation of paragraphs four and five to the criminal Legislators of South Dakota:
"Nineteen people, including five former police officers, have been criminally charged in connection with a string of daring and sometimes violent robberies in Southern California, which were staged to look like law enforcement raids as the suspects used police badges and equipment to fool victims, federal authorities said Thursday.

Though the scope of the nearly five-year investigation was first made public in 2004, new details emerged with the arrests this week of a California prison guard — taken into custody Thursday — and of former Los Angeles and Long Beach police officers. Three other suspects remain at large, authorities said.

The group committed more than 20 robberies and burglaries in Los Angeles and neighboring communities over a span of 2 1/2 years until its ringleader, a Los Angeles police officer, was arrested in 2001 on drug charges.

"What makes this case so disturbing is that the defendants include five sworn law enforcement officers who abused their badges, their uniforms and their oaths of office to engage in criminal conduct under the pretense of conducting real police operations," said Thomas O'Brien, head of the criminal division for the U.S. attorney's office in Los Angeles. "While this story sounds like a script from 'The Shield' or 'Training Day,' it actually happened."

Los Angeles Police Chief William J. Bratton focused his comments on the three former LAPD officers who allegedly were part of the crew. The officers, he said, "are traitors to the badge that the men and women of this department so proudly wear, traitors to their fellow officers and, most importantly, traitors to the public."
Now for an adaptation of paragraphs four and five above to South Dakota's criminal Legislators:
"What makes this case so disturbing is that the defendants include all one-hundred and five sworn State Legislators who abused their offices, their public trust, and their oaths of office to engage in criminal conduct under the pretense of conducting real legislative operations," said Ron Branson, head of National J.A.I.L.  "While this story sounds like a script from 'The Shield' or 'Training Day,' it actually happened."

Ron Branson focused his comments on all one-hundred and five South Dakota State Legislators who were part of the crew. These Legislators, he said, "are traitors to their offices of legislation, and traitors to everyone in South Dakota government, and most importantly, traitors to the public."
Most of you are uninformed that a formal NOTICE has already been sent via U.S. Mail to all one-hundred and five State Legislators throughout South Dakota asking them to cease and desist from their unlawful acts, and to apologize to everyone in South Dakota. We could not send that U.S. Mail via internet to everyone on this list because it is fourteen pages in length, and would require an attachment, which we hesitate to do. Below is a few paragraphs from that formal NOTICE.
"Thus we must hereby inform you and put you on NOTICE that your proposed Resolution, and your subsequent vote on that Resolution, were clearly unlawful acts by taking sides in an election contest in an attempt to control and influence the vote on Amendment “E”, in clear violation of South Dakota Constitution, Article VI, section 19 – Free and Equal Elections-Right of Suffrage and Article VII, section 1 – Right to Vote, as well as South Dakota Attorney General’s Official Opinion No. 88-28 - Expenditure of Public funds on Election Issues.  Further, that your unlawful acts are also violations of fundamental rights secured by the United States Constitution.  ....

Gentlemen, this is exactly what Amendment “E” and our actions have done here and continue to do. However, to the contrary, your actions fly in the face of Art. VI, sec. 27, show contempt for the People and Constitution of South Dakota, and make a mockery of justice, moderation, temperance, frugality and virtue. Your actions here have irrefutably proven our motto, “Reform never comes from government, it must always come from the People.”


Fourth, Art. VI, Sec. 19 – Free and equal elections – Right of suffrage – Soldier voting, in pertinent part states:


“Elections shall be free and equal, and no power, civil or military, shall at any time interfere to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage. …”  [emphasis added]


Gentlemen, what part of the word “free” don’t you understand?  What part of the words “no power” don’t you understand? What part of the word “civil” don’t you understand?   What part of the word “interfere” don’t you understand?  Your HCR 1004 blatantly states in its first and last paragraphs:


“A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION, Urging the voters of South Dakota to reject the Judicial Accountability Initiated Law (J.A.I.L.) which will be submitted to South Dakota voters in November 2006, designated Amendment E.

*     *     *

“NOW, THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the House of Representatives Eighty-first Legislature of the State of South Dakota, the Senate concurring therein, that the South Dakota Legislature strongly urges all South Dakota voters to protect our citizen boards, to protect our system of justice, to protect economic development, to protect all our citizens from frivolous lawsuits that would be authorized by the Judicial Accountability Initiated Law, and to vote against Amendment E.[1]


Urging the voters of South Dakota to reject?  Strongly urges all South Dakota Voters … to vote against Amendment E?  Your actions fly in the face of Art VI, Sec. 19, and thus again you show contempt for the People of South Dakota and the South Dakota Constitution.  Equally, Art. VII, Sec. 1 – Right to vote, in full states the same as Art. VI, Sec.19 above.  Gentlemen, why do you fail to show respect for and honor to the People of South Dakota and the sacred right of suffrage, the right to vote?


Gentlemen, your actions also fly directly in the face and authority of our own South Dakota Attorney General's Official Opinion No. 88-28  - Expenditure of Public Funds on Election Issues, issued June 29, 1988, .... 


As such, we hereby formally request that you promptly, individually, and collectively (the entire House and Senate) reconsider your vote, and formally and publicly withdraw HCR 1004.  We further formally request, that you publicly (in newspapers, radio, television and on official websites) apologize to the citizens of the State of South Dakota, for using your offices and public funds to interfere to prevent the free exercise of the PUBLIC’s right of suffrage (to vote), either for or against Amendment “E”.  We request that this action on your part be taken and accomplished promptly, no later than March 10, 2006, so as to quickly stop and mitigate the damage you have wrought to a free and equal election process. 


Besides being blatantly in violation of the law and your oaths of office to follow the law, your actions smack of an imperial arrogance, an abuse of your office and power (loaned to you by the People), a fundamental failure to understand that you are servants of the People and of an outright contempt for the People you represent. ....


What's more, these South Dakota Legislators have violated clear statutory South Dakota law, to wit,
" Publication of false or erroneous information on constitutional amendment or submitted question as misdemeanor. Any person knowingly printing, publishing, or delivering to any voter of this state a document containing any purported constitutional amendment, question, law, or measure to be submitted to the voters at any election, in which such constitutional amendment, question, law, or measure is misstated, erroneously printed, or by which false or misleading information is given to the voters, is guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor."
Source: SL 1913, ch 107, § 9; RC 1919, § 7224; SDC 1939, § 16.9923; SL 1982, ch 86, § 83.  Said criminal statute is set forth on the official South Dakota website at http://legis.state.sd.us/statutes/DisplayStatute.aspx?Type=Statute&Statute=12-13-16
Simply put, this statute provides that every South Dakota Legislator in this instance of Amendment E is subject to arrest, detention for trial before a jury on the evidence, conviction, and sentencing to incarceration.
There exists several options here, which we do not now wish to enumerate. However, should you wish to offer recommendations as to how this statewide conspiracy and criminal scandal should be handled, we will be glad to consider your recommendations. Please know that the potential for conflicts of interest involved here are extremely staggering, and raises the question of who is innocent and who is not conflicted? This is the thing that media frenzies are made up of, and is bound to draw the attention of the entire nation as something heretofore unheard of in the possibilities of an entire state legislature being arrested.

(Back to Home)