Trial: 2018 TR 5950
STATE OF IL VS JAMES FRANK OSTERBUR
SCHEDULE of the courtroom drama.
For the sake of brevity, the certainty of knowledge, the realities of discipline, and the purpose of order; a rundown of the details that are intended to occur at trial, shall be given.
The prosecutor shall in fact identify the following; because it is his or her only case/ unless they wish to enlarge this case to include the failures in both state and federal government! I do not/ my purpose for tax protest or revolt; is to establish trial, as described: pertaining only, to the “life or death issues that threaten our world, WITH EXTINCTION or horrors”. Your failures are your own. I am here to defend life and planet!
The prosecutor: This defendant has deliberately chosen for a period of slightly over two years, to refuse the tax payment, for renewal of a trailer license plate, in the fee of eighteen dollars a year: in direct violation of our law. There is no cause or excuse, EVERYONE must pay his or her tax; or their burden transfers to us!
I, the defendant, do testify: that I did indeed fail to pay the fee for trailer license renewal/ both last year and this year. On the grounds, that those who are employed, and sworn to uphold constitutional laws: have in fact chosen to rebel against those laws, and not only refused my guaranteed constitutional legal rights. But caused me harm, penalized me without cause, extorted money, unjustified ridicule, and illegal contempt; even using their position for organized crime. Supporting and hiding organized terrorism (the university is god), realities that are in fact treasonous (the constitution is dead) ; to this nation, state, and world. The corruption is deep/ but it is no longer my concern; a 40 plus year lifetime, is enough; I am literally only interested in keeping life on earth from extinction. Realities that are not connected with that, are discarded. When a jury has convened for this trial purpose which are: the “life or death issues that threaten our world, WITH EXTINCTION or horrors”. And in fact jury has established judgment for or against redress of grievances for our society, and our world. I am, done.
THIS TRIAL; is so small, and so menial in concept, that it has crept through the cracks of “governmental court supervision (as does exist to quell any democratic rising of the people over power; proven through court trials already in existence)”. This judge, and this prosecutor should be given thanks for obeying the law. Whether intentional or not, we are here at trial. But the fact of trial; will NOT be completed until the public is in fact notified: they have a legally organized and a valid choice, to control and own, their constitutional government occurs. Or the jury decision is no; you refuse you’re duty and continue to hide from reality.
Through legal actions, and guaranteed rights: the decision required is formed through, we the people OWN this state or nation: is here. I need only one trial, and one jury decision to accomplish that; and so do you. From there (you’re chance to survive, by your own decision, is complete), you are on your own. Only what is required of me, for the actual investigative cases redress can initiate: will be given beyond that. This becomes, YOUR fight/ your cost/ your trial/ your democracy/ your future/ your information and enforcement: etcetera. I am done, other than allowing my name, or oversight, if needed; to establish that trial.
On a personal note: The gossip, the assumptions, the ridicule, the contempt, the failure to respect, cowardice, and more; are the end of my concern for your wellbeing. Love exists, but it needs truth, and value to survive; little of that, is here/ because you want what you want; which is the basis of all lies. Want hides from life/ pride destroys it. The quest then, is to find love, and remove the barriers; without endangering someone else’s life. If not human companionship, the world remains a miracle created by love: accepting that, limits loneliness as, GOD exists. I do apologize to those who tried to love me, “I just couldn’t be distracted, with our whole world of life, at risk”. Simple as that. Simple as, I have no ulterior motive: “save life, the sacred reality of nature, and earth”.
Regardless, the purpose here is: To find a jury, and complete the journey that is to identify and create adherence and obedience to constitutional first amendment LEGAL redress of grievances. A reality of legal rights, that does intent to unite this people: by giving them the power to change the direction of our lives and our government, as democracy intended. Through the investigation of specific realities we the people deem as necessary to the protection and defense of our lives and our world. Thereby enforcing our claim: as is the purpose of democracy, “that we rule ourselves” as owners here.
OUR OWN ORIGINAL courtroom JURISDICTION; in all constitutional rights or guarantees legal matters that are distinctly “democratic authority”; as is this case. is beyond question/ WE, are the owners here in this state or nation.
Our vote, for a governmental change of direction and purpose: Shall be decided by ourselves (one person one vote: NOT, a vote for someone to vote for me). The disciplines necessary to obtain an accurate vote and legal authority for our decision: is applied as the duties involved through this courtroom. Our own vote and decision decides/ but the appellate review of that decision: is for the court. What we decide CANNOT be outside the scope of constitutional law and directive.
That, is the very foundation of redress of grievances: to rule over ourselves, by constitutional contract. To confirm that reality, and rule over our employees; by demanding a sworn oath of office! More simply, THE FINAL SAY, as to the direction and decisions that control our nation or state: is ours! But only if it complies with our constitutional rights and realities.
Because these are sufficiently specific realities, brought forth in this trial; as have been listed: are so severe, OUR WORLD CAN DIE! A moratorium can be demanded by this jury/ and enforced by this court. Every judge has the right and duty: to defend the nation and state/ by whatever legal means are necessary!
Let there be no doubt: this is not frivolous nor is it, a menial trial/ as proven by the cost of letting these few, be WRONG. Nor is it rebellion in any form! The law is the law, democracy owns no throne: we the people shall rule ourselves. BUT IT IS by uniting for our common purpose that makes redress possible. Without a vote to identify, we the people have spoken, and taken control over this portion of our democracy. There is no authority other than to initiate a legally authorized, and identified vote. It makes no difference which court that adherence to the law arises from. Democracy belongs to us all, “both great and small”. Let the law rule, let the evidence decide.
So the first question in this trial: IS this a legitimate right to protest taxation; enforced by the need for democratic actions, through the obedience of a courtroom to our constitution? Or is it blatant disregard for personal responsibilities to “our government, which is the constitution”? In democracy the foundations of law and rights; are the ruler!
The second question: if the need for democratic actions exist, then the jury must identify and create the proper notification, so as to allow a vote, by we the people. Which, if yes we will is chosen: true redress of grievances (we own this state and nation; means we WILL decide the outcome by our own governmental authority) is born.
You have the right to CHOOSE, by governmental mandate as owners: but there is no going back. Yes or no! True democracy: we own our LEGAL choice/ we are the authority of our society under constitutional direction; is being decided. OR in contrast the choice is: TO REMAIN as we are today, with all its consequences coming! Simple as that.
I demand three things from a jury pool: 1. You must be able to read and understand our American English language reasonably well. 2. You must be willing to read, for what will be about one hour; to attain the necessary knowledge for this case. The written word relies upon no one’s ears, or what they believe they heard. Instead of what was believed to be said, what WAS actually written is simple and plain. So there is no cause, or excuse, for that discussion. 3. You must accept, the price for your decision in this particular trial. If yes society will change. If no, you have determined; to remain under threat, and as you are. NO second chances! If your society fails, because you said no: a portion of the blame falls upon you. You did not let them choose for themselves. Your duty to demand WE MUST MAKE OUR OWN CHOICE FAILS LIFE, because they decided for that; you are innocent. You let life choose its own fate. That society must make this choice: to defend itself, or not/ is a matter of freedom. IF redress exists: then it is, To demand reality without delusions by investigation; truth by the evidence no hearsay, promises, stories, or theory inconsistent with constructive reality (let the people decide); and constitutional law enforced as our democracy intended it to be: MUST, and SHALL be returned to our lives.
By our own vote then, we are free to choose our fate. By giving this state or this nation the right to investigate, determine publically as a state or nation: what is true and what we cannot allow to be WRONG! Democracy is enforced. Thereby a public vote: YES, allowed; OR NO stopped, is our legal weapon, and there is no other except as the law provides. These DECISIONS: On the threats WHICH CAN make us all extinct, or bring horrendous consequences, TO THIS EARTH, where few if any will survive. Are elemental in nature: YES OR NO/ maybe, or its cousin compromise; is not consistent with life/ where the consequence is forever.
This jury does not exist to determine what is true regarding those threats. This jury does exist to determine if this state or nation shall OWN THE RIGHT, to investigate and determine as WE THE PEOPLE. If we will stop those threats by OUR OWN society decisions, as best we can. That constitutional right, as it legally exists through democratic actions created within the first amendment, redress of grievances: as is the law. Grants our democratic authority! That does mean, by inference, in truth: we have no confidence in those hired to protect, inform, or choose for us. Or, we would not be so threatened!
Jury selection can be quick: as I do not intend anything other than a realistic representation of society should be asked to make this decision for the people. This is a democratic guaranteed legal rights case, and we all have an equal say, therefore an equal duty or vote in the same. We can for my part simply inform the jury of what is required by the defendant. What is required by the prosecutor; and let all stand who wish to participate. Then simply picking the first twelve plus alternates; as “faces, from the crowd”; as the judge would choose. Democracy, representing and choosing for society; is like that/ it is what it is, rather than what I or they want.
I would further state: it would be advantageous to inform those jurors, the information found on www.justtalking7.info will provide a first look, at trial; a thorough preparation for the decision to come. This is a democratic action case, and what the jurors do with this information, outside the court, previous to their trial decision (discussing it in the crowd or whatever); is irrelevant to me. As, I do so swear in this statement, “let it be so”. I am not hidden, I am not in possession as an owner; other than “same as every other citizen”/ demanding my constitutional guarantee. To call for uniting this people against what does in fact threaten us all. Whether they agree is up to them/ but my right to legally call them together for a vote: by producing sufficient cause/ has been met! This is not political/ this is life or death by proven reality: CLEARLY LEGAL by the nature of its purpose. This is a public trial, for a public purpose, within a public court, with public consequences! For public discussion and vote. Thereby discussion of trial, the constitutional authority depicted and democratic purpose established, is a true public cause and right. By deciding for redress, you remove the cause (we have a better way) called “civil war”/ and its gun.
After charge and defense above are read,
Trial will be: the prosecutor speaks, as is consistent with protocol; if desired.
The defendant will then ask the jury to read the introduction to trial. Timed at approximately 16 minutes for most. (he shall provide the documents) the prosecutor may inspect.
the prosecutor may rebut, when the jury signals it is done/ or time allotted has past.
The defendant will then present “the realities” as provided to the court to the jury; asking them to read this as MY fundamental purpose, FOR this trial itself. Timed at approximately 6 minutes.
The prosecutor may rebut.
The defendant will then respond, in accordance with that rebuttal; and present a short 5 minute visual display to the jury with regard to statement 3 (the ignition of atoms/ the delusion of fusion); as found in the realities, that we face. OR IF the court prefers a media presentation to the jury, can be found at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD4U4UC0tH8&feature=youtu.be sd drive of the video sent as evidence for the court.
Or at www.justtalking6.info the video sun burned 7 minutes 26 secs. By simply using this, the prosecution knows exactly what is coming.
The prosecution may rebut or provide its own media presentation.
I will rebut or add as I deem necessary. The other documents prepared and sent to the court will then be given to the jury, as part of this trial.
If the prosecutor has a closing argument I may respond in a limited fashion. If not, the jury is ready to deliberate.
If for some reason the written documentation is not allowed, even though it is filed. I will be reading it, as I desire, in court. If I will add to my own written closing argument: I deem that my right.
This is still a courtroom, with the potential to do me harm; and I will support my own, legal rights. The last “traffic court case” which the judge, refused constitutional law: and then buried the case of a constitutional mandate. Threatened me, with a thousand dollar fine.
In summation or as the judge himself desires:
The judge offers appellate limitations (after their decision to notify has been formed/ but, before it is released). The judge will offer and control what is Within constitutional guidelines for notification to the public by the jury. In their quest to determine how and what to notify the public with; legal decisions shall occur. What and how he, shall allow the jury to guide their public notification; for a vote in society, is essential to law. No, you can’t do anything you want! A Sufficient notification, warning to be certain of the duty needed to clarity the cause, is essential to democracy, and life itself.
These limits occur: Because the guidelines for arousing the public to vote can cause the existence of fear, which can cause a mob, or panic to arise. The decision to understand and then balance, what is or is not a threat, requires proof. A vote yes by the public shall include the mandate: THE COURT SHALL ENFORCE, a legal moratorium on those who have established a threat; until we vote!
By this acceptance of “knowledge proven by truth/ or consequences so severe we CANNOT allow the risk to be WRONG”; shall decide. In determining, what actions we can or cannot take to protect ourselves: this proves consistent with liberty (you cannot risk my life), and justice (I have legal rights)! These facts, determine peace in society/ freedom determines your happiness and mine. The value of society accepting the responsibility to rule ourselves: because “WE CANNOT ALLOW THEM TO BE WRONG”. Is elemental to democratic authority; as defined, because our lives, our future, and even our world is at stake. That is consistent with the purpose of justice (this affects us all), and the value of democratic actions (no one cares more), that are to be taken as a duty (the right decision must be made) to our state, world, or nation.
A realistic ad, for example: notification may be started as,
This jury and this courtroom from the state of IL; has decided to call for the legal democratic authority, provided by constitutional law. To summon a vote from we the people, in order to take control over our future as WE THE PEOPLE DECIDE. Because we are threatened in ways so extreme, that our lives, our nation and our world; could potentially be, and are in danger. YOUR INDIVIDUAL VOTE ___date, place, and time___________ decides, to begin that process, or not.
IF we will choose the future, specifically related to these threats for ourselves/ OR, let those who have chosen, and allowed these events to take place: shall remain in charge, of that portion, of our collective society. Yes or no: the question is, someone to vote for me/ or my own vote decides?
www.justtalking7.info introduces the legal trial, establishing this cause.
Or in contrast to that; an appropriate link to this courts website.