<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Lawyer Defends Racial Discrimination During FIJA Activism</title>
	<atom:link href="http://whoplanswhom.com/2010/04/27/lawyer-defends-racial-discrimination-during-fija-activism/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://whoplanswhom.com/2010/04/27/lawyer-defends-racial-discrimination-during-fija-activism/</link>
	<description>Who plans whom, who directs and dominates whom, who assigns to other people their station in life, and who is to have his due allotted by others? — Friedrich Hayek</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 May 2012 19:22:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Recap: FIJA Literature Distribution &#8211; DFW Alliance of the Libertarian Left</title>
		<link>http://whoplanswhom.com/2010/04/27/lawyer-defends-racial-discrimination-during-fija-activism/#comment-30</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Recap: FIJA Literature Distribution &#8211; DFW Alliance of the Libertarian Left]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2010 17:07:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whoplanswhom.com/?p=581#comment-30</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Informed Jury Association (FIJA) outreach was pretty uneventful except for again seeing &#8220;a total apologist for government aggression and discrimination&#8221; who we had first met in [...] ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Informed Jury Association (FIJA) outreach was pretty uneventful except for again seeing &#8220;a total apologist for government aggression and discrimination&#8221; who we had first met in [...] </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: georgedonnelly</title>
		<link>http://whoplanswhom.com/2010/04/27/lawyer-defends-racial-discrimination-during-fija-activism/#comment-29</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[georgedonnelly]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 15:16:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whoplanswhom.com/?p=581#comment-29</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Kudos on your activism. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kudos on your activism. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris H</title>
		<link>http://whoplanswhom.com/2010/04/27/lawyer-defends-racial-discrimination-during-fija-activism/#comment-27</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chris H]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2010 15:27:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whoplanswhom.com/?p=581#comment-27</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[1. Your link needs to be to the 1876 Constitution. &#160;My progression from the 1836 to the 1845 Constitutions was to demonstrate that &quot;as in other cases&quot; are deliberate words that were added.
 

 
2. Those talking points need to follow a progression from &lt;strong&gt;as in other cases &lt;/strong&gt;to&#160;&#160;Article 1, Section 15 &quot;The right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate. &#160;The legislature shall pass such laws as may be needed to regulate the same, and to maintain it&#039;s purity and efficiency&quot;
 
Jury nullification is a consequence of a trial by jury, &quot;for the courts cannot search the minds of the jurors to find the basis upon which they judge.&quot;
 

 
Your point of contention will ultimately be with the Code of Criminal Procedures Title I, Article 36.13.
 
&quot;Jury is judge of facts. &#160;Unless otherwise provided in this Code, the jury is the exclusive judge of the facts, but it is bound to receive the law from the court and be governed thereby.&quot;
 

 
The counter to this is again to return to the Texas Constitution, Article I, Section 29.
 
&quot;To guard against transgressions of the high powers herein delegated, we declare everything in this &quot;Bill of Rights&quot; is excepted out of the general powers of government and shall forever remain inviolate, and all laws contrary thereto, or to the following provisions shall be void.&quot;
 

 
Article 36.13 is in direct contradiction of Article I Section 15 as it does anything but maintain the purity of the trial by jury.
 
&#160;
 
&#160; ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1. Your link needs to be to the 1876 Constitution. &nbsp;My progression from the 1836 to the 1845 Constitutions was to demonstrate that &quot;as in other cases&quot; are deliberate words that were added.</p>
<p>2. Those talking points need to follow a progression from <strong>as in other cases </strong>to&nbsp;&nbsp;Article 1, Section 15 &quot;The right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate. &nbsp;The legislature shall pass such laws as may be needed to regulate the same, and to maintain it&#039;s purity and efficiency&quot;</p>
<p>Jury nullification is a consequence of a trial by jury, &quot;for the courts cannot search the minds of the jurors to find the basis upon which they judge.&quot;</p>
<p>Your point of contention will ultimately be with the Code of Criminal Procedures Title I, Article 36.13.</p>
<p>&quot;Jury is judge of facts. &nbsp;Unless otherwise provided in this Code, the jury is the exclusive judge of the facts, but it is bound to receive the law from the court and be governed thereby.&quot;</p>
<p>The counter to this is again to return to the Texas Constitution, Article I, Section 29.</p>
<p>&quot;To guard against transgressions of the high powers herein delegated, we declare everything in this &quot;Bill of Rights&quot; is excepted out of the general powers of government and shall forever remain inviolate, and all laws contrary thereto, or to the following provisions shall be void.&quot;</p>
<p>Article 36.13 is in direct contradiction of Article I Section 15 as it does anything but maintain the purity of the trial by jury.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp; </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

