Media Bypass stirred up quite a ruckus with the Hoppy Heidelberg story. Heidelberg, who was concerned about federal prosecutors preventing the grand jurors from pursuing their inquiries into who John Doe #2 was in the Oklahoma City bombing, became an instant talk show celebrity. For a while he was on a major television talk show every other day.

I've had more than one telephone conservation with Mr. Heidelberg. In one conversation he told me, "I know all about the grand jury."

Unfortunately, nothing could have been further from the truth. If Mr. Heidelberg and the others like him serving on the grand juries knew anything at all about how grand juries were supposed to work we would simply not have the federal government misbehavior that we have to put up with on almost a daily basis: Ruby Ridge, Waco, gun laws, income tax criminal laws, and all the rest.

Supposedly, the grand jury goes all the way back to Athens and pre-Norman England. By 1681 the last "grand jury abuse" had taken place in England under Charles II. In 1791 the grand jury was incorporated into our Fifth Amendment:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury. . . Fifth Amendment, U. S. Constitution

Published opinions, those explanations of the law issued in various official law books, such as the Supreme Court Reporter, the Federal Reporters (federal appeals court decisions), the Federal Supplements (federal district court decisions), and other, more ancient books, tell us how federal judges have construed the phrase at different times in our history.

Compare what all three branches of government have done to the original meaning of "indictment by grand jury" and you can come to only one conclusion: what is today called the federal grand jury and " indictment by grand jury" is the most monstrous constitutional fraud ever perpetrated upon the American people.

Let me prove it to you.


The very purpose of the requirement that a man be indicted by a grand jury is to limit his jeopardy to offenses charged by a group of his fellow citizens acting independently of either prosecuting attorneys or judge. Stirone v. the United States, 80 S.Ct. 270, 273 (1960).


At least, that's the rhetoric. As Hoppy Heidelberg and thousands of others like him have discovered after being "sworn to secrecy" in grand jury investigations, federal prosecutors simply treat the grand juries themselves as minor annoyances or pieces of furniture on an indictment that has been prepared, solely by the prosecutor, in advance of the so-called "investigation."

I.e., grand jury "investigations" these days in all cases, are simply manipulated by by federal prosecutors to reach a predetermined result. See e.g., In Re November 1979 Grand Jury, 616 F 2d. 1021, 1026 (7th Cir. 1980). (The Seventh Circuit referred to as the "Seventh Circus" by those who have had to deal with it, is the federal court of appeals in Chicago overseeing the federal district courts in Illinois, Wisconsin, and Indiana).

Supposedly a sufficient basis for indicting for criminal offenses may only emerge at the end of an investigation. U. S. v. Dionisio, 93 S.Ct. 764, 772 (1973).

Supposedly, the grand jury is to act as a "shield" between the awesome power of the federal government and the criminally accused. First National Bank of Tulsa v. U. S. Dept. of Justice, 865 F. 2d 217, 219 (10th Cir. 1989).

In reality, "it is edifying indeed to a new prosecutor to learn how willingly people are to let trouble descend upon their fellows." Remark made by Melvis P. Antell, judge, in 51 A.B.A.J. 153, 154 (1965).

In reality, any experienced prosecutor will admit that he can indict anybody at any time for almost anything before any grand jury. Campbell, Delays In Criminal Cases, 55 F.R.D. 229, 253 (1972).


Imagine that someone has committed a federal crime and you happen to be the victim: tampering with your mail, in violation of 18 U.S.C. section 1701, 1702, 1703, and for conspiracy against your rights, 18 U.S.C. section 241, and you want the grand jury to issue an indictment and bring the miscreant to justice.

It won't happen.

First, you can't go to the grand jury directly, to even attempt to do so is a felony, 18 U.S.C. section 1504. Second, you are supposed to go, under modern legal procedure, to the United States Attorney (or one of his assistants) and file a complaint, which will then be presented to the grand jury for consideration.

It won't happen.

What will happen is that a career bureaucrat, a United States Attorney will spend all of about five (5) minutes evaluating your complaint with two (and only two) thoughts in mind:

One: how much work is this case going to cause him?

Two: will this case advance his (or her) political career by providing an opportunity for favorable publicity?

What will not be considered is your problem.

Let me give you a couple of examples.


Peggy Blank is a lady from Some Beach, Florida who had an $8,000.00 roofing problem with a local contractor whose legal bill ran over $80,000.00 from lawyers who did more harm than good. She then sued her own lawyers for legal malpractice.

Three years later she is still trying to get her case in front of a jury of her fellow citizens. Court clerks and judges have committed felony after felony to prevent her from doing so.

Mrs. Blank then contacted her Congressman, Rep. Mark Foley (one of Newt Gingrich's right hand men, no less) in order to attempt to "get through" the United States Attorney in Miami and present her case to a federal grand jury.

She is still waiting.


Cheryl S was arrested in October 1994 in Missouri and charged with one count of breaking and entering a house (she had never even crossed the property line) and kidnapping her own grandchild, though the closest she got to him was within about thirty (30) feet after the police had arrived.

Apparently, her ex-husband had bribed an alcoholic methamphetamine-addicted prosecutor to bring the charges against her. After three days of testimony (none of which bore any relation to the charges on the indictment, her ex-husband testified he was "afraid." of her) she was convicted by a Clay County jury of, apparently, "being a bad person" and "scaring an ex-husband."

As an interesting aside, England used to have "attainting juries:" bring in a verdict like this and, upon a second trial, the jurors on the first jury were put in prison, had their houses leveled, their woodlands cut down, their crops burned, and when released from prison, were legally "dead" (they had no rights whatsoever).

Cheryl S later contacted the U. S. Attorney in Kansas City, who predictably did nothing (not even "media value" apparently). Cheryl then filed an Application to Appear Before the Grand Jury (asking a federal judge to order the United States Attorney to put her evidence in front of the grand jury). How this is done is described in Application of Wood, 833 F. 2d 113 (8th Cir. 1987).

Were the grand juries i.e., in Missouri federal courts operating properly, it is possible half the "public servants" in the State would be indicted. Cheryl has seen (and been the victim of) male guards fondling women's private parts (with the warden's permission), seen women go into labor and come back with bruises all over their legs from being shackled to a hospital bed during delivery, given unnecessary C-sections because the guards were in a hurry, and a host of other abuses.

FOR THE REST OF THE STORY: Continued on Page 2



This site was updated on November 29, 2006