R. J. Tavel, J.D.

Mediation Counselor of Law 

4000 North Meridian Street, Suite 5E

Indianapolis, Indiana 46208-4023

                                                                                                                                                 August  1, 1994

 

                        RE:    JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION QUESTIONNAIRE                                                                      

Dear Colleague:

 

            Please allow me to introduce myself.  I am the State-Coordinator of the Fully Informed Jury Association (FIJA), a nationwide educational organization that seeks to inform all Americans of their rights and responsibilities when serving as trial jurors, since it is there that the laws of the land are actually applied to real people.  As such, my first goal is to inform all Americans that as trial jurors, we have the right to judge not only the evidence presented to us, in order to decide whether the defendant actually broke the law and damaged another party, but also to judge the law itself, in order to decide if justice will be served by applying it to the defendant in the case at hand.  In short, jurors may always cast their vote on the verdict or award, if any, according to conscience.

            Indiana is one of four states having provisions in their constitutions that explicitly acknowledge the right of the jurors to judge both law and fact (Indiana Constitution, Article I, Section 19).  Twenty-four state constitutions still mention this right in the section that guarantees freedom of speech (this is because, historically, juries have so often had to come to the rescue of those who broke laws that prohibited criticism of the government, most viciously enforced when the criticism was factual). 

            During the past century, however, jurors have rarely been told about their rights to judge both law and fact.  Instead, they're usually admonished by judges that they may decide "only the facts," and must accept the law -- like it or not -- as it is given to them by the judge.  The result has too often been that jurors have gone home knowing deep inside that something went wrong -- they followed the instructions, but did not achieve a just verdict, a verdict that agreed with their conscience, their sense of right and wrong.

            FIJA believes that justice depends upon trial jurors knowing that they never have to vote for a verdict that violates their conscience.  They should also know that government of, by, and for the people depends upon jurors knowing that their verdict is a vital form of democratic feedback -- and that the trial jury is more powerful than all three branches of government combined, because it is the final check and balance on the entire system.

            Toward teaching everyone these truths, we have been busy writing articles, lecturing in schools and colleges, advertising, leafleting at fairs, street corners and at courthouses, even declaring and celebrating a National Jury Rights Day (September 7, 1993 and, for example, as explained in the enclosed "Governor's Proclamation" pamphlet). One of our major educational thrusts is to seek Trial Rules and/or legislation requiring that jurors again be clearly told of their right to judge both law and fact before they decide the fate of a fellow human being.

            QUESTION:  Do you support the re-establishment of the trial by jury not only as the decider of justice in the case before them but as a commentator on the law itself, so that lawmakers enjoy ongoing access to the will of the people, expressed through the verdicts of citizen juries? YES ______ NO ______ 

                                                                                                                                    [Please sign (and print) your name below]

 

                                                                  Signature  __________________________________

[Results to be announced on Jury Rights Day,                   

please respond by August 20, 1994 at my                Print Name  ___________________________________       

Indianapolis address printed above.]                                                              

                                                                        For Liberty in Our Lifetime, ______________________________

                                                                                                R. J. Tavel, JD.

Will you help us?  We need volunteers and (tax-deductible) contributions!

We the FULLY INFORMED JURY ASSOCIATION, INC.

(I.R.C. Sec. 501(c)(3))

P. O. Box 59  Helmville, MT 59843      1-800 TEL-JURY

 

 

 

Who enforces the bill of rights?  check one:

 

() police  () judges () lawmakers () voters () juries

 

          If you checked "POLICE," we recommend you talk to people like Rodney King, the family of Denver Smith, Ronnie Jackson, R. J. Tavel, J. D., or Fred Sanders, then guess again.

 

            If you checked "JUDGES," recall what the U. S. Supreme Court has done lately to your rights of free speech, privacy, property, speedy trial by peers,  and bail, to name a few; and recall what Judge Sarah Evans Barker and  Judge Patricia Gifford have done lately, to name a few.  Guess again.

 

            If you checked "LAWMAKERS," consider that "no (one's) life, liberty or property are safe while the legislature is in session."  Lawmakers listen to well-heeled special interests, and pass laws that are not merely ill-conceived, but injurious to the Bill of Rights, and therefore invalid.

 

            If you checked "VOTERS," we fail to share your fantasy.  Our votes on election day merely offer us non-choices between those who want to govern and judge us, most of whom will end up abusing the power of their office and eroding the Bill of Rights, instead of enforcing it.

 

            BUT, If you checked "JURIES," give yourself an "A+" for the day!  Jurors still have the right to acquit someone because they believe the law is wrong or wrongly applied, but only if they happen to KNOW about this right, and the legal establishment isn't telling...

 

            That's why FIJA -- the FULLY INFORMED JURY ASSOCIATION -- was formed.   We tell jurors about their right to say "NO" to bad law and to vote on the verdict according to conscience.

 

            WHY?  Because this is how we, the people, provide each other with fair and impartial trials. That does not happen when we apply laws to others that we do not believe in ourselves (like Congress does).

 

            Another job of the jury is to give common-sense, non-political feedback to lawmakers:  a long series of acquittals by different juries in different cases that all involve the same law sends a clear message to the legislature that the law is not reflecting the will of the people.

 

            Can you think of some laws that damage our rights (as in our Bill of Rights?)  Try "profile stops."  You are not alone.  Now what?

 

            If you want to join others who promote jury power as a way to protect our rights while delivering justice, find a FIJA activist and ask how you, too, can get active.  Call 1-800-TEL-JURY [835-5879] or write to FIJA, PO. BOX 59, HELMVILLE MT 59843.  In Indianapolis, you can contact  R. J. TAVEL, 4000 North Meridian Street, Suite #5E, Indianapolis, Indiana 46208 or call  317/923-3399.

 

Happy Jury Rights Day!

Tuesday, September 6, 1994