> You are wrong. You do not have to "enforce" it, just defend your status and jurisdiction.

I'll have to read through that. But I've seen, more than once, how the jurisdiction was "managed" to fall where the prosecutors want it to fall.

One such example I read about was with a dark net market where investigators tasked someone in DC to buy a banned substance so they can claim there now was a "victim" there. They knew they'd get a better chance at conviction in DC. And it worked.
State declares its own actions as above board, et voila, you can have your jurisdiction and conviction.

> Now come the other question: if somebody PLEAD guilty, so in other words recognize the wrong, WHY in the hell I have to try to pardon him?

There's nothing to pardon. I never asked for that.

> virtue signaling that serve absolutely nothing.

Agreed.

> which they can't enforce

You are wrong. You do not have to "enforce" it, just defend your status and jurisdiction.
https://livingintheprivate.blogspot.com/p/jurisdiction-is-key.html

Now come the other question: if somebody PLEAD guilty, so in other words recognize the wrong, WHY in the hell I have to try to pardon him?

All this with petitions, protest, signatures etc is just a cheap useless theater, virtue signaling that serve absolutely nothing. PATHETIC BEGGING.

DarthCoin

That's the difference between people with balls (sovereign) and cowards (slaves).

If I know I didn't committed any crime I will die defending MYSELF (not with lawyers) and never plead (bargain) anything.

But I also expect very few people to choose that path.

And that's the only reason why I disagreed with your initial blanket statement:

A man that is innocent of any crime will NEVER EVER plead guilty, no matter what.

I think that is true for very few people and that most will be inclined to take the deal.

They'd rather spend less time in, or take a deal for a more comfortable period of incarceration than risk it all in a claim for their own sovereignty (which they can't enforce).

In this case, the state wanted them to ask for a less severe spanking for having shown an interest in breaking free.

It's a classic abusive relationship with a state we're all born into, trained to accept and, heck, in many cases even defend.

bitcoin

Vegas 2026: The DOJ's Developer Exemptions

0xbitcoiner

> That's the difference between people with balls (sovereign) and cowards (slaves).
> If I know I didn't committed any crime I will die defending MYSELF (not with lawyers) and never plead (bargain) anything.

I have no issue with that.
But I also expect very few people to choose that path.

And that's the only reason why I disagreed with your initial blanket statement:

> A man that is innocent of any crime will NEVER EVER plead guilty, no matter what.

I think that is true for very few people and that most will be inclined to take the deal. 
They'd rather spend less time in, or take a deal for a more comfortable period of incarceration than risk it all in a claim for their own sovereignty (which they can't enforce).

In this case, the state wanted them to ask for a less severe spanking for having shown an interest in breaking free. 
It's a classic abusive relationship with a state we're all born into, trained to accept and, heck, in many cases even defend.