CONVICTION versus PREFERENCE
DAVID BEATS GOLIATH, AGAIN
By Betty FreaufApril 6, 2002
NewsWithViews.com
PORTLAND, OR. A number of years ago an attorney by the name of David C. Gibbs, Jr. of the Christian Law Association published a pamphlet entitled "Conviction vs. Preference". An excerpt said: "When a man goes into court and says, 'I believe I ought to do some things, but I think that I should be more tolerant, a little more open-minded about this,' he is saying he has a preference and the court says, 'make up your mind what you believe.' The Court says knowledge about your beliefs is critical in the courtroom. You must be able to define what you believe. You must tell the court whether you hold them as preferences or convictions..."
The Hebrew children, Meshach, Shadrack and Abednego, would not bow to the wicked King Nebuchadnezzar and they ended up in a fiery furnace as punishment. In the heat of the furnace, the three Hebrew children suddenly realized they were not alone (Daniel 3:16-25) for a fourth which looked like the Son of God was in there with them.
A conviction is rooted in the conscience and cannot be changed without changing that which essentially defines the person. And so it has been with Lon Mabon, Chairman of the Oregon Citizens Alliance Education Foundation in Oregon, who was released the week of April 1st after serving 42 days in the Multnomah County Jail because he refused to bow down before a judge who won't to take the proper constitutional oath. [Read: Another Patriot Jailed]
For the first time in their many years of married life, Lon and his wife, Bonnie, were separated for more than a few days but through it all, they kept their faith intact and believed that good would overcome evil.
According to an April 5, 2002 press release issued by Lon Mabon, The Oregon Court of Appeals granted his Motion to stay the execution of the order issued by "alleged" Judge Ronald E. Cinniger that had incarcerated him since February 20, 2002 and the Court of Appeals further declared that the OCA Education Foundation has a likelihood of prevailing on the oath issue when the full appeal is heard.
"This is a great day for the Constitution of the State of Oregon... and establishes that judges are not above the law..." said Mabon.
"The Constitution of the State of Oregon says that Circuit Court judges must take a specific oath. (Article VII, Original, Section 21). As of this date, the Circuit Court judges are still refusing to take the required oath," said Mabon and this "ruling is the first victory toward forcing those judges who, for whatever reason, have resisted obeying the Constitution."
But not only is this a "divine" ruling in Oregon but no doubt other states have a similar problem with the oath their judges may be taking so can any of the readers begin to see a domino affect falling across the United States if this is, indeed, true?
And this all came about because ONE MAN by the name of Milt Mitchek from a rural area of Baker County, Oregon began studying the law many years ago when his then 23-year-old son was arrested on the charge of driving without a license. At the time he was stopped, the young man was not aware his license had been revoked. With the father's help, the son chose to defend himself in court and the rest is history.
Milt Mitchek can now stand toe to toe with any licensed Bar Association attorney in our state and come out victorious because most of them aren't properly instructed in law school about the very constitution which they swear to defend. [In fact, some attorneys recognizing the system is corrupt are quietly cheering Milt on from the safety of their offices.] For instance, it says a jury is to be instructed in both the "law and the facts". The law can be "goofy" and common sense must prevail by the jury when they deem such a law is unjust. However, the judge (usually a former attorney) tells the jury to judge only the facts and oftentimes the judge does not allow pertinent testimony to be introduced making conviction of innocent people for the prosecuting attorney, part of the judicial brotherhood, easily achieved.
Abraham Lincoln is quoted as saying if people are given the truth, they can be counted on to solve any national crisis, so if jurists are given the truth, fewer convictions may be the result. But in the absence of this truth, the jails fill up and perhaps this is why Oregon has been building so many new prisons.
Mitchek decided early on it was either 'JUSTICE or JUST US' and he went to battle. About the time the approximate 10-year lawsuit of Plaintiff Catherine Stauffer was gaining momentum, Lon became acquainted with Milt who told him about the oath issue. And like our Founding Fathers, Mitchek and Mabon were willing to put their fortunes, their lives and their sacred honor on the line for the rest of us. Perhaps through this all jurors will become educated sufficiently so that they no longer will convict innocent people in a judicial system that seems to have run amok! If so, I'm sure Mitchek and Mabon would have considered all the sacrifices they have made worthwhile because if we can't trust our court system, who can we trust? Who will be safe against the "politically correct" environment we've all been observing these last few years? Thank God, thus far, the long-awaited justice seems to be prevailing.
Betty Freauf has been a GOP activist for many years. Elected county chairman, state party secretary, congressional district chairman, candidate for Governor of Oregon in 1986, the house of reps in 1988 and 1990.
She published a weekly "Legislative Action" newsletter for five Oregon Legislative Sessions, is an Excommunicated citizen Review Board Member to "WATCHDOG", Oregon's Child Protective Agency. (Fired for asking too many questions)
Related Articles:
Constitutional Party Of Oregon Sponsors Rally For Political Prisoner