Seeking to avoid the death penalty, Nikolas Cruz, the shooter at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, has offered to plead guilty to 17 acts of premeditated murder. The prosecutors should accept this offer and end the proceedings as quickly as possible. .. He was taken into custody less than an hour after the attack. Perhaps we can learn more from him, if we are willing to listen. – Victory Girls: Nikolas Cruz will plead guilty; will we do the right thing too?
Legally – technically – Timothy McVeigh also offered to plead guilty; if the Prosecutor, Judge and/or Jury would allow him to provide the court with his honest necessity [mil-nec.tygae.org.za] reasons for his actions. Either his own attorneys or the prosecutor and/or Judge refused to allow him the opportunity to plead to necessity; to educate the public about his reasons for why he did what he did. McVeigh’s execution was faked, presumably by individuals who objected to his denial of a necessity defence [us-v-tjm.tygae.org.za].
Legally – technically – Osama Bin Laden also offered to plead guilty; if the United States Government would allow the Taliban to transfer him to the International Criminal Court, and if the International Criminal Court Prosecutor and Judges would allow him to provide the court with his honest necessity reasons for his actions. The United States Government refused the Taliban’s offer.
Legally – technically – Anders Breivik also offered to plead guilty; if the Prosecutor, Judge and/or Jury would allow him to provide the court with his honest necessity reasons for his actions. Initially his own attorneys refused demanding he plead to insanity; and then the Prosecutors proceeded to accuse him of mental disorders. EoP MILED Clerk, on behalf of EoP Applicants; filed applications [no-v-ab.tygae.org.za & lj-v-no.tygae.org.za] requesting Breivik be granted a free and fair trial. The insanity allegations were minimized and Breivik was allowed a partial necessity defence.
» EoP Leg Sub: 17 Feb: Victory Girls: Nikolas Cruz will plead guilty; will we do the right thing too?.
Braveheart Shibumi Satori Honour Trial Lawfare:
Perhaps there is a better name to refer to this ‘honour fair trial’ activist tactic; but for now, EoP MILED Clerk shall refer to it as Shibumi Satori Honour Code lawfare tactic; or Braveheart SS.
Braveheart is used in the context of: ego literacy [ego-eco-literacy.tygae.org.za]: the courage to listen, understand, forgive and admit mistakes.
Honour code is a Nash Equilibrium / Prisoners Dilemma conditional or unconditional cooperator act, which is a legal equivalent of a WWII Marine protecting a Navajo Code Talker to keep his Navajo code secret; with his life; as depicted in The Windtalkers; whereas a Braveheart SS enables the prosecutor to allow the accused to honourably disclose his/her necessity alleged criminal act motives etc; with his/her life.
In this case the prisoner’s dilemma Nash equilibrium occurs where the players choose to conditionally unconditionally cooperate for a win-win benefit. All benefit from the offer in terms of raising the ‘sincerity skin in the game’ stakes of the game; and observing the responses of the other participants. If the offer is accepted, other benefits include among others: accused benefits from a free and fair trial, the prosecutor from having honourably provided a free and fair trial, cooperative inter-group trust bridge building, etc.
Satori and Shibumi are words which originated in Japanese culture: Shibumi means ‘elegant simplicity’. Satori means: sudden enlightenment.
Shibumi in the personality of a man, it is … how does one say it? Authority without domination? Something like that. How does one achieve this shibumi, sir? One does not achieve it, one . . . discovers it. And only a few men of infinite refinement ever do that. Men like my friend Otake-san. Meaning that one must learn a great deal to arrive at shibumi? Meaning, rather, that one must pass through knowledge and arrive at simplicity. – Shibumi by Trevanian
Put simply the free and fair trial tactic is used by a Braveheart Shibumi Satori activist, in a necessity based legal dispute; where the media-mob lynching environment surrounding the trial make it difficult if not impossible for the prosecutor, judge or jury to provide the accused with a free and fair trial. The accused and prosecutor parties in the dispute are notified of the Braveheart SS activist ‘request free and fair trial’ offer: (1) Both parties are requested to consent to the Braveheart SS free and fair trial offer; if the accused sincerely subjectively believes s/he will be acquitted by a jury of her/his peers in such a free and fair trial; if granted the opportunity by the prosecution to plead to necessity and justify her/his actions. (2) If so: Braveheart SS backs up her/his ‘sincere free and fair trial request’ by confirming her/his willingness to receive the death sentence penalty the accused is facing; if the accused is convicted by a jury of his/her peers. If the conviction penalty the accused is currently facing is a prison sentence, accepting the Braveheart SS offer would require the accused to consent to a death penalty sentence if convicted.
Factors considered re: Braveheart SS support for an accused: (a) whether the accused is an ally or enemy is irrelevant, the tactic is potentially more effective in terms of building trust to enable cooperative root cause problem solving, when used with an honourable enemy accused; (b) a pre-requisite is that the accused subjectively and/or objectively values some code of honour however s/he defines it; and that their alleged criminal actions were subjectively sincere in accord with his/her honour values; (c) where the prosecutor, court, jury and/or media mob may triviliaze the accused’s honour values, either because they personally subjectively have no socio-cultural ‘honour’ values; or they may have different ‘honour’ values.
Braveheart SS Offers:
Braveheart SS Free and Fair Trial Offers were made to the accused and prosecutor and/or other possible pardoning authority government officials; in the following trials:
US v Timothy McVeigh:
A summary of the offer can be found in: 06 Nov: Timothy J McVeigh: Formal Apology: Re: Fraud of Radical Honesty Cult.
In my 2001 letter to President G W Bush and yourself – subsequently deleted from my laptop by unknown individuals – I requested that Pres Bush give you a stay of execution; so that you could meet with the Oklahoma City bombing victims; in an alternative venue interested in the evidence; the whole evidence and nothing but the evidence. I suggested such an alternative venue to include the founder of Radical Honesty and Radical Honesty Trainers; to help facilitate honest forgiveness and truthseeking problem solving related to the causes of the OKC bombing and US foreign policy. Such alternative venue would provide OKC bombing victims and/or victims and/or critics of US foreign policy who were (a) angry with you; and/or (b) not being provided answers to their questions by the legal court proceedings; with the opportunity to (c) express their anger and get over their anger; and once so done; and/or (d) listen to your justifications. Once they had considered your Ecology of Peace evidence; they could determine whether your actions were objectively and/or subjectively legally (a) justified, and if so: acquit you and cooperate with you to address the root causes of OKC bombing; or (b) unjustified: and convict you and sentence you and me to death.
Corrections to 2001 letter to President G W Bush and yourself:
My current working hypothesis conclusion is that all that is absolutely necessary is for such an alternative venue would be (a) The ‘Justice Quartus de Wet & Jury Percy Yutar mercy’ guarantee prior to the start of proceedings; that if the Judge or Jury finds us guilty; the Judge shall agree to our EoP cultural mercy preference not to waste taxpayers funds as prisoners; but the opportunity for us to be granted a two year exile to live together somewhere quietly in a village in the Siberian or similar wilderness; before the Red Army execute us by firing squad and bury us together in unmarked graves in the Siberian wilderness; (b) The judge and jury’s commitment to the evidence; the whole evidence and nothing but the evidence; so that both Ecology of Peace and Masonic War is Peace parties could submit their evidence; for the Judge and/or Jury’s consideration; (c) Once the Judge or Jury have considered all the Ecology of Peace and Masonic War is Peace evidence; if they determine that your Ecology of Peace actions were objectively and/or subjectively legally (i) justified, to acquit you; or (ii) unjustified: to convict you and sentence you and me – as your EoP Bram Fischer expert witness to the subjective reasonableness of your military necessity actions — to death in Siberia; as per ‘Justice Quartus de Wet & Jury Percy Yutar mercy’ guarantee.
» EoP Leg Sub: 06 Nov: Timothy J McVeigh: Formal Apology: Re: Fraud of Radical Honesty Cult.
US v Osama Bin Laden:
The offer was submitted by email to various US, Pakistan, Afghanistan officials shortly after I became aware of the Taliban’s offer to extradite Osama bin Laden to the International Criminal Court at the Hague, for his alleged involvement in the World Trade Center Attacks; on the condition he was granted a free and fair trial by a jury of his peers.
I was here to deliver a letter through the State Department to the new administration in Washington, hoping that the United States policies to the region and in particular to our country would at least be rethought. In the meantime I was giving some talks in some schools here, which I did. [Characterize the United States relationship to your government] Well after the Soviet withdrawal the United States just ignored Afghanistan, ….. now there is one problem, the existence of terrorism and Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan. We have been telling people that if someone can give us some kind of evidence we will resolve this problem, but so far we have not been given any kind of evidence that shows that Bin Laden is actually a terrorist. [Is it your and your governments position that Bin Laden is not a terrorist, that he has not taken credit for terrorist acts, and that he does not in his rhetoric suggest terrorist acts against the United States] Well, he says he has done nothing, and we don’t know nothing. If anybody claims that he is a terrorist, they should prove it. [But his rhetoric suggests that he is, does it not?] We have not seen anything that shows he is a terrorist. We have said that he is not even allowed to be politically active against any country [You were meeting at the State Dept on issues of Bin Laden and other issues?] Exactly, we have said that we have given three proposals to the United States, so far: One of those is that we will try him in Afghanistan, provided that we are given evidence, that was rejected. Our second proposal asks the United States that if they think he is a threat to the security of the United States, they have to send an international monitoring group to watch him for the rest of his life, so that he has nothing and meets nobody. That was also rejected. We gave a third proposal in which we asked three countries: Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and a third Islamic country selected by the United States to decide his future, so that we have some kind of justifications to our people, that the man is not a good guy and he should be expelled or extradited, or whatever, but we have not been assisted in this sector. For the fourth time I was here in the United States again asking ‘Please open the doors of negotiations on the Bin laden issue’. [Do you acknowledge that Mr Bin Laden pays your government for protection in Afghanistan?] Thats absolutely wrong, he has not that much to pay us. [So he stays there under the protection of the Taliban because what?] He was in Afghanistan 17 years before the Taliban existed. Such people were instigated to go to Afghanistan and fight the Soviet Union and such people were called the hero’s of independence, not by us. Such people were called the hero’s of independence by the United States, by Mr. Ronald Reagan. And all of a sudden they were changed to terrorists. Okay if he is a terrorist, how are you going to justify to kill a man without giving him a fair trial?. The United States tried to kill him, without even telling us that he is a terrorist. All of these things have aggravated the situation. He was nobody and he has been made a hero now. He has been made so famous. Six thousand children were named after him in Pakistan only, and so many restaurants, cars, shoes, jackets, all these things. This is not our creation. ….. When Afghanistan was your playground and you fought their war and all the problems in Afghanistan are a reflection of the world’s policies, not our creation. So if you don’t like the image in the mirror, please don’t break the mirror, break your face. So in Afghanistan we have said again and again, the problems are not our creation. I will give you an example. If you ask a pilot to go and bomb someplace, he will do it. If you ask him to slit a childs throat, he will not do it. You don’t see what you are doing, you are starving children. All you see is the destruction of two [Buddhist] statues, which is not a serious problem for us. Our children are much more important than these statues. There are many things that you pollute. What about the water in the world, you are polluting the water in the world, and that causes drought in our countries. You are polluting the air, what about that? You are destroying those old forests, thousands of years. What about that? Why aren’t they getting so much media attention as these two destroyed Buddhist statues? – Sayed Rahmatullah Hashimi; Afghanistan Taliban Envoy; Charlie Rose: Sayed Rahmatullah Hashimi & Barnett Rubin: 01.02.03.
» IG: 17-10-27_eopvwip-rulespollution.
Norway v Breivik:
The offer was communicated as part of EoP ‘Acquittal or Firing Squad’ court documents filed in Norway v Breivik [no-v-ab.tygae.org.za]; declined, and referenced by Mr. Breivik in his ‘thank you’ letter [PDF].
“My client has expressed a wish for a Japanese expert. This wish has to do with the concept of honour. He believes that a Japanese person will understand him better than someone from Europe,” defence lawyer Geir Lippestad told financial daily Dagens Naeringsliv. … The lawyer for the confessed killer in Norway’s twin terror attacks that claimed 77 lives said his client has two lists of demands. … Breivik, 32, links this second list to his willingness to share information about two other alleged terrorist cells that he has mentioned during questioning. “They are completely impossible to fulfil,” Mr Lippestad said, adding that although Breivik has agreed to be examined by local psychiatrists, he also wants to be investigated by Japanese specialists. “He claims the Japanese understand the idea and values of honour and that a Japanese (specialist) would understand him a lot better than any European would.” – Telegraph: Norway attacks: Anders Behring Breivik demands to be examined by Japanese specialists [archive.is/2LwOO]; Pakistan Express Tribune: Norway gunman wants Japanese psychiatrist: Lawyer [archive.li/6kIIS]; The Guardian: Norway gunman making ‘unrealistic demands’, says lawyer [archive.li/thgX8]; ABC Australia: Norway gunman asks for Japanese psychiatrist [archive.li/f9SG6]; RFI: Radio France Internationale: Norway gunman wants Japanese psychiatrists, government to resign [archive.li/K0v9V]
Page Setup: 06 May 2018