Jan 182016
 

Paul Murray brought up how the US Constitution says that crimes must be tried by courts in reference to the college rape tribunals (which we know are a part of the false rape industry.  Specifically, he is referring to the end of Article 3, Section 2 of the US Constitution which says:

Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

The only exception to a jury trial for a crime is impeachment.  For all other crimes, all citizens of the US are guaranteed a jury trial.  Despite what feminists think they can get away with, the constitution makes no exception for rape.  The existence of college rape tribunals are in violation of Article 3, Section 2 of the constitution.

Additionally, the sixth amendment is also relevant.  It says:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

College rape tribunals violate every single clause of the sixth amendment of the constitution.  Feminists have declared war on Article 3 & the sixth amendment of the US Constitution.  (Feminists have declared war on the entire US Constitution, but that is a subject for another time.)  Feminists have been running this war for a long time.  First, feminists tried to use the Commerce Clause in the constitution in the first VAWA (violence against women act) to allow women to sue men they accused of rape even when said men had been exonerated by the criminal justice system.  For obvious reasons, the courts declared this to be unconstitutional.

Now, feminists are trying to declare rape a “civil rights violation”.  Remember that the college rape “tribunals” got started because of a letter to colleges from the Dept. of Education’s Office of Civil Rights.  The trick feminists are using is have have men accused of rape not charged with a crime, but a “civil rights violation”.  Because these men don’t get charged with an actual crime, they are denied due process.  This is a violation of the spirit of our entire legal system and the constitution.

This reminds me of a science fiction TV show from the 90s, Bablyon 5.  In that show, the President of the Earth Alliance (all of Earth plus all human colonies) wanted to make himself a dictator.  One of the things he did was to create a organization called the Nightwatch which was designed to root out non-“peaceful” behavior.  (This could be easily be replaced with civil rights “violations”).  Non-“peaceful” behavior conveniently included criticizing the government of the Earth Alliance.  The Nightwatch wasn’t involved in the criminal justice system so it did not need to follow the rules of due process.  Even people who had joined the Nightwatch questioned this:

Because the Nightwatch was enforcing directives from the Earth Alliance political office (which could be replaced with the Office of Civil Rights easily) due process was thrown out the window until someone was charged with an actual crime.  In other words, a person who committed a burglary, for example, would get full due process, but someone who criticized government policy would be dealt with by the Nightwatch who was completely free to ignore due process.  The reason for this was that burglars or bank robbers or drug dealers or most criminals weren’t a threat to the coming dictatorship (which happened later in the series).  Anyone who spoke out against the government was.  Rather than completely take away due process which everyone would notice, they took away due process only in the areas that were relevant to them.  This allowed them to hide what they were doing.

Feminists are trying to do the exact same thing.  Feminists don’t care about taking away due process from burglars, bank robbers, drug dealers, etc. because the crimes those people commit aren’t crimes where (it is assumed that) women are the victims.  On the other hand which something like rape, feminists want due process taken away because they want women to have the power to destroy mens lives just like the Earth Alliance government in Bablyon 5 wanted the power to destroy anyone who criticized them.  (It goes without saying that male victims of prison rape won’t benefit from this.)  Also, like the Earth Alliance government, not trying to take away due process in general gives feminist the benefit of being able to hide what they are doing (at least until the lawsuits from men start showing up).  This is why colleges were chosen to host these “tribunals”.  By starting them on college campuses, most people wouldn’t be in a position to notice them especially since they wouldn’t have a broader effect on due process.

On Babylon 5 the endgame of the Nightwatch was to merge it with regular security/police (which happened).  Similarly, the feminist endgame to the college rape “tribunals” is to merge them into the government as a “civil rights” court and enforcement system where due process is ignored since it is not a criminal court.  Such a thing is a violation of the US Constitution and needs to be destroyed before it can even be created.

  12 Responses to “The Feminist War On Article 3 & The 6th Amendment Of The US Constitution”

  1. B5 was a great show.
    College rape tribunals remind me of the Soviet Union with the feminists playing to role of the KGB.

    • This is worse than the Soviet Union. The Soviets still maintained the pretense of a proper criminal justice system. Feminists don’t even bother with that.

      • Did they have a child support system in the USSR, where fathers bared from seeing their own children?

        • No. Such a thing can only ever happen in a nation that is both a Democracy and very prosperous, as it is hugely wasteful of all resources, and the notion of buying female votes is moot, as there is no voting.

          No non-democracy will subsidize single motherhood, and even among democracies, only the wealthiest can.

  2. The other point to note is article 3, section 1: “The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.”

    This, specifically, is the section that outlaws kangaroo courts.

    • The importance of this section is that it is the job of superior courts to ensure that lower courts are following correct *methods* for trying cases. The rules of evidence, eg: that hearsay is inadmissable. Superior courts don’t typically retry cases, they review that the lower courts did what they do according to the usual rules concerning how you go about trying a matter.

      It’s exactly this that these campus courts get wrong. They are as illegitimate as a court that decides cases with coin-flips: then methods they use to try fact and law are not the ones that our civilisation has spent the last few centuries getting more-or-less right.

  3. This has the effect of :

    a) Colleges and universities themselves price themselves out of the market, being replaced by much-cheaper MOOCs.
    b) More men retreat into VR Sex anyway..

  4. See THIS is why I like Sci-Fi SCI-FI is FUN TO WATCH and IT WARNS YOU IT WARNS YOU OF UPCOMING EVENTS!

  5. Here is some off-the-charts misandry :

    http://www.feministcurrent.com/2016/01/07/its-time-to-consider-a-curfew-for-men/

    These femsluts and Angelo Gage deserve each other, since both calls to action are entirely incompatible with each other.

  6. […] Feminists continue their war on Article 3 and the Sixth amendment to the US Constitution.  This time several women sued the University of Tennessee for “violating Title IX”, creating a “hostile environment” for women, and using “an unusual, legalistic adjudication process that is biased against victims who step forward”.  How did the University of Tennessee do all these things?  By following due process: […]

  7. […] a woman (usually who had sex with the man) actually had to make an accusation against that man.  Thanks to the reclassification of rape as a civil rights violation such standards of due process no …  At Colorado State University – Pueblo, a male athlete and his female trainer start a […]

Leave a Reply to Peter Clifford Cancel reply

Translate »
%d bloggers like this: