(1) The Right & Duty to hear complaints directly from citizens, and not just through the U.S. and District Attorneys (Miller v. Smith, 12/18/81, West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, see vol. 30 of the Criminal Law Reporter of 1/27/82, page 2319).

(2) The Right & Duty to conduct an investigation of anything they please, whether the U.S. and District Attorneys agree or not; and to raise money (donations, etc.) to finance an investigation if the U.S. and District Attorneys will not allocate the necessary funds to conduct the investigation.

(3) The Right & Duty to subpeona or summon any and all witnesses in all investigations. The Grand Jury, which is under the Judicial branoh of government - court system, does not have the power to delegate the power to summon or subpeona witnesses to the U.S. or District Attorneys who are under the executive branch of government. No one can ever delegate this power (Wilson v. Philadelphia School District, 113 ALR 1401; Scott v. Sanford, 15 L Ed 691): and the U.S. and District Attorneys do not and can not ever constitutionally have this power as it is granted and reserved solely to the Judicial branch of governmemt (the Courts) per the 9th & 10th Amendments and Articles 3 & 6 of the United States Constitution.

(4) The Right & Duty to question all witnesses directly in person with any and all questions, and so disregard, if they choose, all testimony from any witness who did not appear in person before the Grand Jury to give said testimony.

In addition, the Grand Jury should note that all witnesses have the absolute uncontestable Right not to be a witness against themselves per the 5th Amendment of the United States Constitution. They can not be forced to answer any question, incriminating or not, unless they voluntarily waive their 5th Amendment Right not to be a witness against themselves in regard to that question. The government may grant use-immunity in regard to testimony (specific questions) from a witness if that witness voluntarily agrees to accept such use-immununity and thus voluntarily agrees to waive his 5th Amendment Rights in regard to answering a specific question or questions; but even so, a witness may excercise his 5th Amendment Right not to be a witness against himself in regard to any or all questions/testimony even if the government will grant use-immunity to that witness in exchange for providing testimony. This is the ABSOLUTE RIGHT OF THE WITNESS, and can not be challenged or contested. (See 5th Amendment of the United States Constitution and Point One - Constitutional Law, on the attached Memorandum on Money.)

(Use-immunity is unconstitutional. It was first passed as statute in 1862,declared unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1892, then was revived by Nixon in 1970 for "Star Chamber Secret Inquisitions", where, under color of law, witnesses are forced to answer all questions or go to jail for contempt of court and stay there until agreeing to testify. This law is unconstitutional and absolutely Null & Void; and any U.S. or District Attorney or Judge or anyone else who tries to use or enforce it is guilty of violating Title 18 USC Sections 241 & 242, and should be indicted under those statutes for violating that witnesses Constitutional Rights! )

(5) The Right & Duty to not rely on or trust the prosecutors (U.S. and District Attorney's) judgement on the proper order of questions and the proper handling of a witness. The Grand Jury can ask any question they want (and the witness may plead the 5th). If the witness acts suspiciously the Grand Jury has the Right to completely disregard any or all of that witnesses' testimony and to refuse to issue any indictment based on that witnesses' testimony. The Grand Jury must question everything they see and hear, especially that which is contrary to their own good judgement and common sense.

(6) The Right & Duty to seriously question all prosecutorial evidence and methods; and refuse to indict if their questions are not answered satisfactorily.

(7) The Right & Duty to take as much time as they need and want to consider an indictment, and must not allow the prosecutor or anyone else to rush them into making a decision. They must take as much time as needed to ensure no injustice will occur; and that innocent citizens will not be indicted; and that no one will be indicted for violating a bad unfair unjust law; thus ensuring that Justice will be served. If the issues, facts, and laws are unclear, or the Grand Jury is unsure, they must take more time to investigate or else refuse to issue an indictment and not take the risk of indicting an innocent individual or a victim of a bad unjust law.

(8) The Right & Duty to refuse to issue an indictment if they have reasonable cause to believe the accused did not commit tne crime charged or if they feel that the law the accused is charged with violating is a bad, unjust, or unconstitutional law. The Grand Jury has the Right & Duty to decide if a law is good or bad in their opinion, and if they feel that the law is bad they have the absolute Right and Duty to refuse, and must refuse, to issue an indictment.

(9) The Right & Duty to choose to ignore and disregard any or all court precedents-court cases including Supreme Court cases - whether they feel the decisions of the court cases were fair or not! The Grand jury has the absolute Right to question the law and to disregard any or all law/statutes and court cases they feel are unfair or bad, and refuse to indict on that basis. They have the Right and Duty te be guided by common sense and must refuse to apply or enforce a bad, unjust law. "A Grand Jury may vote an indictment or refuse to do so ... without regard to the recommendations of the Judge, prosecutor, or any other person." (Grand Jury Handbook).

(10) The Right & Duty to find probable cause before issuing an indictment, but must refuse to issue an indictment for a bad, unfair, unjust law even if probable cause is found.

Black's Law Dictionary: PROBABLE CAUSE:

"An apparent state of facts found to exist upon reasonable inquiry, (that is, such inquiry as the given case renders convenient and proper) which would induce a reasonably intelligent and prudent man to believe, in a criminal case, that the accused person had committed the crime charged, or, in a civil case, that a cause of action existed."

"A reasonable ground of suspicion, supported by circumstances sufficiently strong in themselves to warrant a prudent and cautious man to believe that the accused is guilty of the offense with which he is charged."

(11) The Right & Duty to NOT issue an indictment in questionable cases merely to pass the responsibility on to a petit Jury (Trial Jury) to decide. It is the responsibility of the Grand Jury to be absolutely sure beyond a reasonable doubt that an indictment is called for, and that "probable cause" exists, and that the law in question is not a bad unjust law.

(12) The Right & Duty to investigate and indict any U.S./District Attorney IRS Agent, policeman, judge, or any other government official or anyone else who treats or enforces an "executive" summons or subpeona (a summons or subpeona issued by anyone under the executive branch of government) as though it were a valid summons or subpeona; which they are not. The power to issue a valid summons or subpoena is granted and reserved solely to the judicial branch of government, ie., the courts, and can not be delegated. (A summons or subpoena, to be valid, must be issued by a court of law, signed b by the judge and the Court Clerk, and stamped with the seal of the court.)

(13) The Right & Duty to investigate and indict any government official or anyone else who violates anyone's constitutional rights or interferes with the Rights & Duties of the Grand Jury; all violations of Title 18 USC Sections 241 & 242, as per Title 18 USC Section 3231; and sue them for any civil damages under Title 42 USC Section 1983 as per Title 28 USC Section 1343. Your Authority: Hardwich v. Hurley, 289 F 2d 529; Bivens v. Six Unknown Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 US 388; and :

"The innocent individual who is harmed by an abuse of governmental authority is assured that he wlll be compensated for his injury." Owen v. City of Independence, 100 S Ct 1398 (1980)

(14) The Right & Duty to check oppressive government and protect the innocent from government abuse by safeguarding fellow citizens from unwarranted indictments, especially under bad, unfair, unjust laws. This is the most important function of the Grand Jury. See: An Essay on the Trial by Jury, by Lysander Spooner; The Jury Instructions given by Chief Justice John Jay in State of Georgia v. Brailsford, 3 Dall 1; Twelve for the People, by Claire Kelley & W. Vaughn Ellsworth, which includes Excerpts From the Trial of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase; all of which wholely substantiate that Grand Juries and Pelit Juries (Trial Juries) have the absolute Right and Duty to Decide the Law, Facts, and Admissibility of Evidence in all Grand Jury investigations and all Jury Trials! (See the enclosed Memorandum on Money and the Booklist for further reference.)

COMPLAINTS TO THE GRAND JURY: A decision has come down from the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals reaffirming the right of citizens to have access to the Grand Jury in order to lodge complaints. The following was printed in Vol. 30 of the Criminal Law Reporter of 1-27-82, page 2319. It is a publication used by attorneys to keep abreast of current decisions on the law.

GRAND JURIES - CITIZENS RIGHT TO PRESENT COMPLAINT TO GRAND JURY - PROSECUTORS, 50.05: Mindful of complaints that the grand jury has become a tool of prosecutors, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals holds that a prosecutor may not prevent a citizen from presenting a complaint to the grand jury. "To fulfill its functions of protecting individual citizens and providing them with a forum for bringing complaints within the criminal justice system, the grand jury must be open to the public for the independent presentation of evidence before it. If the grand jury is available only to the prosecuting attorney and all complaints must pass through him, the grand jury can justifiably be described as a prosecutorial tool...We therefore hold that, by application to the circuit judge whose duty it is to insure access to the grand jury, any person may go to the grand jury to present a complaint to it." Furthermore, the court continues, a prosecutor may not render unsworn testimony in an attempt to dissuade the grand jury from hearing the citizen's evidence. Finally, a writ of prohibition will lie to prevent a prosecutor from attempting to discourage the grand jury from hearing the complaint. (Miller v. Smith; W Va Sup Ct App, 12/18/81).