Anti-Neocons

Yup, happening right now. I'll keep a close eye on things and as soon as some video leaks out I'll link it up. This Grand Jury has the testimony of some HEAVY hitting physics professors. Actually here's a list of the Expert testimony. Basically a nice who's who in the movement

Expert Witnesses:
Richard Gage, AIA , Founder of Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth

Steven Jones, PhD Retired Professor of Physics, Brigham Young University, Founder of Scholars for 911 Truth and Justice

Kevin Ryan, Former Site Manager at Environmental Health Laboratories, a division of Underwriters Laboratories

Chief Investigator:
Jim Hoffman - Software Engineer, co-director of 9/11 Guilt: The Proof is in Your Hands (DVD), co-author of The 9/11/01 Crimes in New York City:Waking Up From Our Nightmare, and publisher of http://wtc7.net, http://911research.wtc7.net, and http://911review.com

Chief Prosecutor:
Don Paul - Author of To Prevent the Next 9/11, co-director of 9/11 Guilt: The Proof is in Your Hands (DVD), and coauthor of The 9/11/01 Crimes in New York City:Waking Up From Our Nightmare

Schedule:
The Three Buildings that Fell
12:00-1:00
The Airliners, their Flights and their Impacts
1:00-2:00
Break
2:00-3:00
The Fires
3:00-3:30
How the Buildings Fell: Explosions and Implosions
3:30-5:00
Break
5:00-6:00
PART 3
Cover Up?
6:00-7:00
Who and What Should Be Indicted?
7:00-8:00
Jurors’ Deliberations and Findings
8:00-9:30

at San Diego State University Aztec Center, Council Chambers, Saturday, April 14, 2007.
All are welcome!

pdf of flyer to event:
http://la.indymedia.org/uploads/2007/04 ... gj_2.4.pdf

Let's hope something like indictments come out of this.

_________________
To be the tree that will not bend when the winds of change are blowing, is to be the tree that will be broken in the strongest winds of unknowing.

-saint

IS this actually some legal proceeding? Or just a conference? How did they get this done. I hope it's for real.

I believe they will have the power to level indictments...i will check again. It is a grand jury. If this description is acurate they will have these powers...


taken from http://courts.delaware.gov/Jury%20Servi ... rgrand.htm

The Attorney General, who is the chief law enforcement officer of the State, prosecutes all criminal proceedings. The attorney general heads the State Department of Justice and appoints a number of lawyers as deputy attorneys general to assist in the performance of the duties of the attorney general.

All criminal prosecutions are brought in the name of the State. The person charged with a violation of law is the defendant. The charge against the defendant may be brought in two ways: by indictment or by information.

An indictment is a grand jury's formal written accusation charging one or more identified persons with the commission of a criminal offense. Each offense charged is stated in a separate count of the indictment.

The defendant will usually have been arrested by the police and held by a committing magistrate for action by the grand jury. Because the defendant will either have posted bail or be in custody in default of bail awaiting grand jury action, it is important that the charge be presented to the grand jury without unreasonable delay and that the grand jury act promptly.

There is a constitutional right to indictment by grand jury for all serious crimes or any charge commenced in Superior Court, unless a defendant agrees to give up this right and consents to the filing of an information. An information is a written charge against the defendant filed by the attorney general rather than by a grand jury.

An arraignment is the defendant's entry of a plea of "guilty" or "not guilty" to the charges in the indictment or information. No trial is needed when the defendant admits to committing the crime by pleading guilty. Upon entry of a plea of not guilty, the defendant must stand trial.

An indictment or information is merely an accusation and is not evidence or indication of guilt. At trial, the defendant is presumed innocent and may not be found guilty unless the State meets its burden of proving to the satisfaction of the petit jury that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.



Looks like the prosecutor isnt their attorney general. Not sure then if they will actually be able to hand out indicments, guess we'll see. Their mission Statement does say it may hand out indictments, but they will have to go through the Attorney General for that i believe.

_________________
To be the tree that will not bend when the winds of change are blowing, is to be the tree that will be broken in the strongest winds of unknowing.

-saint

Well keep us updated! Why is this in MISC category and not 9/11?

Sorry all i saw was 9/11 video section, im still unfamiliar with the site since i joined yesterday. If there is a better place could a mod perhaps relocate this thread there? Sorry to be a pain in the ass. Thnx, and i will absolutely put out any information that comes our way. Peace...

_________________
To be the tree that will not bend when the winds of change are blowing, is to be the tree that will be broken in the strongest winds of unknowing.

-saint

I'm a little confused:

- I thought someone had to be accused of a crime before a grand jury decided if there was enough evidence to go to trial. I didn't think the grand jury did the investigative analysis to decide who should be charged. Is the charge against the whole government or something?

- How can a grand jury in San Diego working on a crime committed in New York?

- Would I be asking these questions if I had googled "grand jury"?

brb

Hi pankcake, all. Thats what i did . I googled grand jury. Their prosecutor isnt the attorney general of their own state, much less new yorks. It may only be a public showing of dissent. If they did want to bring charges after the hearing they would still have to go through the attorney general and they may hit a wall on that. But it is a start I suppose. It is being called a grand jury, and they can bring charges if it is real. I also hit the San Diego Grand Jury site, which I did not see mention this, but their site kinda sucks. The list of expert speakers is basically all one sided. I believe a true grand jury would hear both sides of the arguement, but im no lawyer, just a guy full of hope. A grand Jury usually hears evidence and decides if charges should be brought against people. I think it is mostly for crimes that police dont or cant really investigate, or something along those lines. I'll keep updating as any info becomes available.

_________________
To be the tree that will not bend when the winds of change are blowing, is to be the tree that will be broken in the strongest winds of unknowing.

-saint

I know that at the county level, grand juries usually listen to the accuser's case when particularly high level crimes have been committed such as first or second degree murder or rape in order to decide if there is enough evidence to bring the case to trial. At least that's one of their functions, but that's not a formal definition.