(Explanation of 2nd Law – Attorney's Fees)

We wish to fully reimburse defendants who are not convicted to prohibit monetary attacks. We wish to stop the persecution strategy of bankrupting a defendant with false charges to remove their ability to employ representation for other charges. We wish to remove false accusations. We wish to remove weak and flimsy accusations. We wish to stop the slander of a defendant's character by an abundance of charges with little to no substance. We wish to stop the impact of such secondary issues as publicity, expense of representation, expense of bail, etc.

We acknowledge we will need more courthouses, but far fewer prisons. One of the effects of this law is to encourage private attorneys to offer defendants their services with no or little up-front payments. Most, if not all, defendants who have even a slight chance of winning will be able to obtain a private attorney who can dedicate the necessary hours to the case to provide a reasonably good defense with respect to the defendant's situation. There will still be a need for public defenders for cases where there are no private attorneys willing to represent.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 5th Amendment which reads, "no person shall . . .be deprived of . . . property, without [a conviction]."

Quote, "The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for among old parchments or musty records. They are written, as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of the divinity itself, and can never be obscured by mortal power." – Alexander Hamilton, 1775

(Explanation of 3rd Law – Under Three Years)

The fundamental principal we are adhering to is innocent until proven guilty. We recognize a defendant may pose an immediate threat due to drugs or rage. Those defendants need help. They need access to medical and psychiatric care. Further, we intend to fully strip the police from having the power to incarcerate a person. The police are not judges nor jury and shall not be executioner. On the other hand, when a defendant demonstrates they are unwilling to participate in the judicial system (failing to attend court, etc.), then we are left with no alternative. Notice the focus is on small crimes that can render a maximum sentence of less than three years. We will handle more serious charges with the Seventh Law of Ryvah.

Further, we intend to empower defendants to be able to acquire a fair trial as required by the U.S. Constitution. We intend for defendants to be free and able to do research and assist in their own defense. We intend to prohibit the demoralization, depression, and desperation intentionally, maliciously, and strategically inflicted on the defendant. The most important goal is to eliminate all scenarios of "time served" where a defendant (even an innocent one) will accept a guilty verdict because they have already served more time than would have been required if they had been guilty. This is the default approach to convictions for small accusations. Our government has millions of these convictions. The majority of people who have been convicted of a crime, and served under six months, are innocent. They did not commit the crime. In fact, most cases take over a year to get to trial, frequently two or three years. The morality of keeping a defendant in jail for three years when they are facing a maximum three year sentence is horrific – well that is where we were as of 2021. And we must correct this.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 5th Amendment which reads, "no person shall . . . be deprived of . . . liberty, . . .without [proof they are evading due process of law]."

Quote – "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." – Edmund Burke

(Explanation of 4th Law - Testimony)

No more bribes, threats, or witness coercion. If a witness changes their story, then one story is false and that is very relevant information as to the credibility of the witness. The defendant must have full access to all of this. It has become standard operating procedure for police to offer bribes to witnesses to compel them to lie to convict innocent people. It has also become standard operating procedure for police to threaten witnesses to compel them to lie to convict innocent people. Our goal is to eliminate these unethical practices.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

Quote, "the only means to gain one's ends with people are force and cunning. Love, also, they say; but that is to wait for sunshine, and life needs every moment." – Johan von Goethe, 1749-1832. ++ this concept is employed by the secret societies and governments to destroy obstacles indifferent to truth.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

Quote, "the only means to gain one's ends with people are force and cunning. Love, also, they say; but that is to wait for sunshine, and life needs every moment. " – Johan von Goethe, 1749-1832. ++ this concept is employed by the secret societies and governments to destroy obstacles indifferent to truth.

Quote, "So often people try to use evil to do good under the premise of 'the ends justify the means'; however, the most significant result of using evil is to promote the use of evil." – M. J. Leonard

(Explanation of 5th Law – Age of Consent)

This is the only cultural Law of Ryvah. Thus, it is radically different from all the others. It also serves as a template for all other cultural laws. The rest of the Laws of Ryvah are intended to protect freedom and love for all eternity without any change to the law. By contrast, a cultural law is designed to automatically and dynamically modify itself with the ebb and flow of culture, religion, and science.

The key aspect of this template is a reoccurring reevaluation. Every ten years it will be adjusted. The second key aspect is the non-biased survey restricted to the relevant population where the most accurate data can be obtained.

The next key aspect is the exact definition of the question (parameter of data collection) and how it will be interpreted. This is important because any wiggle room here could subject the law to manipulation by corrupting the question or how the results will be interpreted. When designing other cultural laws it is important to expect the elite in power are going to attempt to sabotage it.

Another key element that is very subtle is the question echoes the exact text of the current laws which regulate that aspect of culture. We want to establish a one-to-one connection. We should be able to claim if you are saying yes to this question, then you are violating the associated criminal law; conversely if you are not, then you are not.

The next key element is the motivator clause. This prohibits the avoidance of a survey to circumvent the law in total. If the government wishes to ignore the requirement to host a survey, then it shall be subject to an unpalatable consequence. As for the topic of this template of a cultural law being the age of sexual consent, it is probably the most appropriate topic based on the vast diversity and intense emotional passion/hatred this topic possesses. Other good subjects for cultural laws would be the criminalization of alcohol, drugs, homosexuality, pornography, blasphemy, infidelity, slavery, and many more. All of which could be broken down. For example, many countries have criminalized homosexuality differently for men than for women.

Next, to understand how to interpret the data, please notice the question asks for a number(an age. Notice, at 25% we define the age. Observe that extreme numbers are irrelevant. Look at this set of numbers (17, 17, 18, 18, 18, 18, 18, 18, 18, 9999). In this example our result is 18 which lands on the 25% mark. The fact someone suggested an outlandish 9999 is irrelevant. It is simply one number and has no more weight than any other number. Further we should understand 25% of the population will be in violation of the law. As far as we are concerned, 25% is very arbitrary. The relevance of it is to identify the severity of a violation of the law. As we increase 25% to 30% we decrease the severity of the law. Likewise as we decrease the 25% down to 20% we increase the severity. To put this in perspective, 30% of the population will get a speeding ticket. 5% will get a DUI. 1% will be convicted of a minor felony of less than two years in jail. This forces us to conclude cultural laws do not follow any level of logic or reasonability.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 1st Amendment which reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."

Quote, "Conceal your purpose and hide your progress, do not disclose the extent of your designs until they cannot be opposed, until the combat is over. Win the victory before you declare the war." – Ninon de Lenclos, 1623-1706. ++ in 1957 after WWII, the first age of consent laws took shape under the guidance of the Council of Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission to install a mechanism that could control civil unrest, and remove the leader of an uprising. It had nothing to do with protecting children – that was just a sales pitch.

Quote, "Recognize the fortunate so that you may choose their company, and the unfortunate so you may avoid them. Misfortune is usually the crime of folly, and among those who suffer from it there is no malady more contagious." – Baltasar Gracián. 1601-1658.

(Explanation of 6th Law – Nudity)

Historically we know the painting "Daybreak" by Maxfield Parish depicting a nude girl was the most popular image on earth in 1925 with reproductions of it found in 25% of all American households. We know in 1945 the U.S. Army used a bare-breasted woman on posters to recruit men for WWII. Since then there has been an agenda to demonize all forms of nudity by the extreme elite.

Anyone who is so fearful, offended, or terrified of beholding a fellow member of humanity in the nude as God created Adam and Eve suffers from an extreme psychological disorder caused by this unnatural manipulation and needs to be admitted to a psyche ward for mental correction. The de-normalization of observing nudity has manifested perversions of human sexuality including sodomy, bestiality, sexual sadistic and masochistic abuse, sexual mutilation, sexual violence, and non-biological homosexuality. We observe there has been an enormous increase since 1945 in all of these behaviors. We acknowledge that a small percentage of humanity is biologically homosexual. They are born that way. It matters not how they are raised. We also know many people who claim to be homosexual are not, and it is only a perversion of their true form. Our goal is to once again normalize nudity as it has been for thousands of years.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 1st Amendment which reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."

Quote, "Words [clothing] put you on the defensive. If you have to explain yourself, your power [beauty] is already in question. The image, on the other hand, imposes itself as a given. It discourages questions, creates forceful associations, resists unintended interpretations, communicates instantly, and forges bonds that transcend social differences." – from 48 Laws of Power by Robert Greene.

Quote, "the value of a thing sometimes lies not in what one attains with it, but in what one pays for it – what it costs us." – Friedrich Nietzsche.

Quote, "Fear of failure in the mind of a performer is, for an onlooker, already evidence of failure." – Baltasar Gracián. 1601-1658. ++ the obscurement caused by clothing causes us to ponder what defect you lack the confidence to reveal.

(Explanation of 7th Law – Payment for Not Guilty)

The goal is innocent until proven guilty. Here it is at the court's discretion/risk to incarcerate a defendant prior to a guilty verdict. Notice, a defendant does not need to be found innocent. It does not matter why a defendant is not found guilty. If the court drops the charges, then the court pays the fine. If the defendant dies, then the court pays the fine. If the defendant gets a hung jury, then the court pays the fine. If a defendant is found guilty on one charge, but not guilty on the second charge, then the court pays the fine on the second charge. Notice, the more charges filed, the more risk is burdened. Each and every charge that does not generate a guilty verdict generates the fine. Our goal is for only legitimate charges to be filed. We also want a conservativeConcerning court. Once a court can guarantee a sentence of thirty or more years, additional charges are moot.

As a side note, the practice of a sentence being reduced should be mostly eliminated. Thirty years should be thirty years with something like a 20% discount for good behavior. It is treason to intentionally misinform the public. If a person's minimum sentence is only four years because they will get 33% time and can earn up to six years off for educational programs, then it is unethical to tell the people 30 years (30x33%=10, 10-6=4).

It is very important to recognize that 100% of this fine is avoidable. A court never needs to risk a payment. Simply do not incarcerate innocent defendants prior to a guilty verdict. If the court is at all concerned with obtaining a guilty verdict, simply do not put them in jail. That, of course, is the true objective. Jail should be reserved for the guilty.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 5th Amendment which reads, "no person shall . . . be deprived of . . . liberty, . . .without [a conviction]."

Quote, "Since the beginning of history, tyrants have used criminal law to crush opposition, non-conformists, and undesirable minorities. Indeed, one's home could not be his castle, his property be his own, or his rights to expression and conscience be intact if he could be searched, arrested, judged, or imprisoned in inconsistent or unjust ways." – Sean Patrick

(Explanation of 8th Law – Double Jeopardy)

Obviously, this is enforcing double jeopardy. The Constitution reads, "no man shall twice be put at risk." A person is put at risk the moment they are arrested. The Constitution has been subverted in many ways. The prosecution can re-file. . .not anymore. A hung jury. . .not anymore. Simply reinterpreting an act as first degree, second degree, etc. to bypass double jeopardy. . .not anymore. Being arrested for the same act from multiple jurisdictions. . .not anymore. Having the case dropped because of a constitutional violation and simply refiling. . .not anymore. With this law, the defendant prepares the defense only once. If they are not convicted, then it is over.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 5th Amendment which reads, "no person shall . . . be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy."

Quote, "Affliction shall not rise up a second time." – King James Bible, referenced by the Founding Fathers in support and drafting the clause about double jeopardy in our 5th Amendment.

Quote, "It is a rule of law that a man shall not be twice vexed for one and the same cause." – A maxim connected to Coke and Blackstone.

Quote, "In a case of 1696, the King's Bench – England's highest criminal court – affirmed the right when it acquitted defendants charged with larceny because they had been acquitted of earlier charges of breaking and entering for the same crime. Though they faced different charges than before, the court's ruling said the defendants could not be indicted for larceny or on any charge 'for the same fact' or deed." – from 'Know Your Bill of Rights' by Sean Patrick.

(Explanation of 10th Law – Corruption)

We must put a stop to all conflicts of interest of government funded organizations. We must stop these organizations from voicing an opinion. Taxpayer money should never go for lobbying. We pay them to do a job. The money should not go to anything but doing that job. Fund raisers are not their job. Money is not to be rerouted via donations. They are not to augment or depend on investments to pay their expenses; that would create a conflict of interest. Using taxpayer money to lobby for bills or candidates who will give them more money is a direct conflict of interest.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through Article II, paragraph 8, the oath, which reads, "I do solemnly swear [to] . . . preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution . . .".

Quote, "Educate and inform the whole mass of the people. . . . they are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty." – Thomas Jefferson

Quote, "The shortest and best way to make your fortune is to let people see clearly that it is in their interests to promote yours." – Jean de la Bruyére, 1645-1696 ++ Bribery and corruption fueled by tax-payers is akin to forcing a man to sharpen the blade of his guillotine.

(Explanation of 11th Law – Pardons)

The statement we make when we declare an act is not a crime is the act should never have been a crime. The idea is to support the fighters for freedom. If we enjoy the freedom to perform an act, it is probable we possess that freedom because someone was willing to go to jail for the right we now enjoy. To continue to punish a person who has been proven to be a fighter for freedom is to promote oppression and discourage people from fighting for freedom. The removal of all evidence supports this goal and inhibits post reform retaliation. By giving the evidence to the defendant, we restore their faith. They can fight for what they believe in and win.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 8th Amendment which reads, "[no] . . . cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."

Quote, "It is better to die on your feet than live on your knees." – Emiliano Zapata

Quote, "It is better to abandon all state laws than to infringe on even one Constitutional right; for we favor anarchy over slavery." – M. J. Leonard

(Explanation of 12th Law – Intent)

We need to divide this term into two separate terms with radically different meanings. Then we need a clear and concise definition which leaves no room for interpretation. This is our goal. In truth, all legal terms should have such explicit definitions. Our goal here is to sever this term in half. The half that contains malice, violence, force, and is clearly unwanted, keeps the old definition with these new requirements. Truthfully, without these requirements, the old definition is unconstitutional in several ways: 1. Freedom of speech, 2. It is vague, 3. It is over broad, 4. It prohibits the right to pursue happiness.

The second definition of the term is devoid of malice, violence, force, and is not unwanted. We have to acknowledge an enormous range of behavior by parents, friends, siblings, fans, and behaviors as people mature, experiment, and practice courtship. The selection of a person whom you will have children with is the single most important decision a person will make during their life. Because of this, the infringement must only be at the point where sex could be eminent. To establish sex could be eminent, we qualify the act with "an expectation that as a result of the act sex could occur." This is not meant to be easy to establish. It is intended to allow a person to cultivate a relation to the point of marriage which would not occur until the subject is legal. This would allow loyalty to be proven, but more importantly, if the relation fails the subject is unharmed and benefits greatly from having it. Truth be told, all of these relations would be expected to end prior to marriage, especially as the age of marriage continues to rise. The benefits to a person who practices social interaction, dating, and courtship are enormous. A second byproduct is well employed and educated breadwinners are likely to comprise the other half of the relation establishing very high expectations in the subject. Losers don't get to participate.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment and is a definition of a term required to achieve the 6th Amendment. "The accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

Quote, "The beginning of wisdom is the definition of terms." – Socrates

(Explanation of 13th Law – Removing Children)

We wish to strip power away from Child Protective Services, while not fully dismantling it. In a healthy society people do not abuse their children, but we don't have a healthy society. The power to rock the cradle must be in the hands of the parent. Nothing but abuse or the child's desperate plea for asylum should allow a government to separate parent from child.

My personal belief is that only four things should separate a child from their parents: emancipation, marriage, adulthood, or death. This belief is based on family honor where you, your parents, your children are all . . .part of you. Of course, with this philosophy I also inherit my father's debts and am punished for my father's crimes. I am one life that (thru procreation) has lived for thousands of years.

In a modern day paradigm devoid of family honor and responsibility, I would acknowledge the need to allow a child to request help and get help. I would acknowledge an injury on a child should cause mandatory reporters to identify the cause and document the incident with photos and an explanation of their research.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 5th Amendment which reads, "no person shall . . . be deprived of life, liberty, or property . . .".

Quote, "The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world." – William Ross Wallace (1819-1881)

(Explanation of 14th Law – Marriage)

Our goal is to remove marriage from government. Marriage is clearly a religious act. Our Constitution states "we shall respect no religion." Our government has no business using the word marriage, domestic partnership, or any other religious act. There should be no laws that reference either, anywhere, ever. It is the respecting of a religion which has established what amounts to a monetary bribe. A monetary bribe which is at the core a conflict. As soon as we recognize this and remove the bribe, all arguments over marriage will be moot.

I have no objection to contracts unless they are verbal. Verbal contracts are prolific with problems, I love marriage contracts that clearly spell out the rights, privileges, obligations, and consequences. A good contract clearly identifies what happens in a breach or termination of contract. It identifies expectations and represents a meeting of the minds were neither party is taking abusive advantage of the other. The government should not pay a man and a woman to enter into a particular contract while failing to pay three men who do the same. One contract should not have benefits and privileges such as survivor benefits or legal immunity for sex acts when other contracts do not. The government should not respect one contract over another, especially when the contract is founded in religious ceremony and structure; that is respecting religion. Imagine if you can, a tax law that paid you $100,000 per year if you were a man with five or more wives. In other words, respecting a polygamous religion. Oh, and we will also add that all your wives must be assigned to you by an elder. Such an imaginary law respects religion, violates the Constitution, and cannot be tolerated.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 1st Amendment which reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."

Quote, "In 1824, James Rothschild married his brother's daughter, and so began the family policy to marry within the family. With such incestuous anchoring the family thrived amidst chaos. Concentration was the foundation of their power, wealth, and stability." Historical fact from 48 Laws of Power by Robert Greene.

Quote, "The Egyptian King Akhenaten married two of his daughters. While this is debated, some historical parallels exist: Akhenaten's father Amenhotep III married his daughter Sitamun, while Ramesses II married two or more of his daughters, even though their marriages might simply have been ceremonial.." – Wikipedia

Quote, "The LDS church men married several women in a church approved polygamous relationships. However, many were widows or elderly women for whom he merely cared or gave the protection of his name. Many men were killed or died and women needed protection of a marriage. This practice was abandoned when Utah became a state. However, rogue groups still practice polygamy today."

(Explanation of 15th Law – Recording)

A. Police are no longer allowed to commit crimes. Police will be held accountable. Full transparency and accountability of law enforcement must be obtained. This is why we require body cams.

B. National security is not a reason to violate our rights. It is a reason for full transparency. Also in part B, we are specifically excluding body cams, hand held cameras and cameras on vehicles. It is intended the Fifteenth Law covers different aspects of surveillance. Notice part A is only one AIPY while part B is ten AIPY. That is because surveillance from structures fixed on real property is capable of revealing much darker secrets. Consider the video footage from September 11th, 2001 of the Pentagon attack. 104 cameras on structures were seized in the interest of national security. Never again! I want the footage on those cameras made public. Those cameras would provide proof of the perpetrator of the attack.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "The accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

Quote, "Truth is so precious that she should always be attended a bodyguard of lies." – Winston Churchill.

(Explanation of 16th Law – Bodycams)

Body cams are required. It's that simple. Notice that we are actually targeting the individual. We expect the government to throw the officer under the bus. This makes them accountable.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "The accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

(Explanation of 17th Law – Restitution)

This is to stop a conflict of interest where the more the police steal, the more money they are paid. The idea of seizing money, assets, etc. from convicted defendants after conviction is great, but none of that money can fall into the hands of law enforcement. Not even the expense of collecting and distributing the money can be reimbursed from money taken from defendants. If the law enforcement are unwilling to give the money to the victims, then don't take it. There can be no exception to this conflict of interest.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through Article II, paragraph 8, the oath, which reads, "I do solemnly swear [to] . . . preserve, protect, and defend the Costituzione . . .".

Quote, 'Everybody steals in commerce and industry. I've stolen a lot myself. But I know how to steal." – Thomas Edison 1847-1933. ++ Let us prohibit the police from doing this to victims.

(Explanation of 18th Law – Inaction)

This concept is difficult; inaction is not a crime. Yet, if you agree to take on a responsibility and then do not do it, this is one action over a long stretch of time. It is not inaction. A babysitter is not inactive if she does not intervene to protect the child she is responsible for. Giving birth to a child is an action that lasts 18 years. Getting elected president is an action that lasts four years. My litmus test is a dead body is in a state of total inaction. A dead body can never be held to have broken a law. A dead president immediately relinquishes all his responsibilities; thus, his dead body cannot fail to do something. It has no responsibilities.

Next we need to acknowledge the need of law enforcement to prevent future actions by ordering a subject to "stop." This is to err in good faith of law enforcement. While we have a lot of very unethical police who will kill an innocent man, we also have a lot of unethical people who will kill a policeman. If the officer orders you to drop your gun, I don't care if it's a cell phone, I don't care if it will smash on the concrete, you need to release it immediately with your fingers spread apart and your hands away from your body in plain clear view while you yell "yes, sir" in a controlled firm voice of respect and fear acknowledging there may be a law enforcement officer pointing a lethal weapon at you who is already fearful for his life. A defendant who plays games, jokes around, or does not take the situation seriously, has earned the right to die. No part of this law is intended to protect you in situations like this.

The next aspect may be even more complex to explain, the use of force as granted by inaction. If you are in a motor vehicle and wish to be inactive, then the officer gains the privilege of removing you from the vehicle. If he cannot locate your lawful privilege of using the roads taxpayers built using taxpayer money where taxpayers established a requirement to be licensed, then your car is getting removed from the road and it will not be allowed to be a threat to the public safety. My advice is to help the officer help you overcome whatever problem you have. If you are on private property, you have a choice, walk off or be dragged off.

Next the subpoena, this is required. Your rights to inaction do not protect you from the needs of the citizens of this country to compel you to testify as a witness. Honestly, if I could make a dead man talk, I would. Notice that I do not reserve the ability to compel a person to serve on a jury. It is my intention and hope that jury members will be financially compensated for their time based on either minimum wage for the unemployed or 150% of a juror's established verifiable income.

Next the concept of failing to purchase a product is aimed directly at health care. I think a national health care program based on the Oregon plan is a great idea, but it must be funded from the general fund. All health insurance companies must be removed and the medical procedures offered must be based on a cost-to-benefit analysis from greatest ratio of benefits to least. There are to be no levels of care so that congressmen and homeless will receive the exact same care. Requirements for the general population must also be required of all congressmen. If a private individual wants private medical care, (not offered to everyone as part of the national health care program,) then the private individual can pay for it with their own money from a for-profit hospital which does not serve the public. Upon analyzing this we realize no one should be compelled to purchase any product.

Next, failing to wear a product; this is obviously aimed at wearing masks in response to Covid -19. We need only contemplate a national dress code that varies by age, gender, and rank where the proud display of religious ideals to a God you do not worship may be required by law. We can never allow this. We can never allow any gateway to this. There can be no exceptions.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 5th Amendment which reads, "No person shall be . . . deprived of . . . liberty [labor], or property [ labor] . . . without [a conviction]."

Quote, "the power to compel a person into action against their will is the power to convert that person into a slave." – M. J. Leonard

(Explanation of 19th Law – Vaccines)

It is understood that many people believe that vaccines are used to depopulate the world. There is evidence to suggest the aids virus was distributed via vaccine. Many people believe that vaccines are used to dumb down and sedate the population into a state of lethargic apathy and acceptance of an indoctrination into slave labor. It is a fact there is a direct correlation between the administration of vaccines to children and autism in children. We need only look at the cyanide laced Kool-aid the citizens of Jamestown were compelled to drink. To understand the absolute requirement to prohibit any government from compelling the citizens to take any vaccine. This law is intended to prohibit the government from harming the parent or child directly or indirectly. The government cannot require you to drink the Kool-aid in order to keep your job, go shopping, enjoy the park, etc. Restrictions are actions against you. If a government agency is paying a private organization to place restrictions on you, then the government agency is taking an action against you and is subject to the fine. Only a private organization is exempt from this law except as defined in part B.

Part B. Focuses on schools, even fully private schools with no government funding. The fine is muchsmaller, but still accomplishes the objective. Also the only act the school is prohibited from doing is refusing to enroll because of a failure to take the vaccine. It is intentionally watered down.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 5th Amendment which reads, "No person shall be . . . deprived of . . . liberty [labor], or property [ labor] . . . without [a conviction]."

Quote, "Hitler used powerful drugs to make 'super soldiers' with no consideration to the fatal side effects. Hitler also used drugs on himself, for energy and strength. He also drugged internees as test subjects to determine the effects of the drugs on malaria, typhoid, and other diseases."

(Explanation of 20th Law – Dolls or figures)

Freedom of speech is one of our most precious rights. Dolls (and their many forms) are a branch of art and freedom of speech. There are agendas to criminalize them. There is already legislation in other countries to outlaw certain types of dolls. This type of an attack uses parental fear with the association of horrific crime. They fabricate a crisis. They find some innocent little girl, and they claim the monster had possession of (something they want to outlaw) in this case, dolls. They launch an elaborate advertising campaign to persuade the public the dolls caused the horrific crime and the only way to protect the public is to outlaw the dolls. At first they will outlaw only a very specific type of doll, something nobody really cares about. Once the community has accepted this, then the definition will be expanded until all dolls are a crime. To see this progression in implementation you need only watch public TV when they depict the statue of David (a doll) which is the iconic symbol of the nation of Italy. Notice how they censor out his mid-section. If you are an Italian, you should be angry. If you are an American, you should be angry. If you are a human, you should be angry. No doll can ever be classified as a crime.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 1st Amendment which reads, ". . .no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech . . .".

Quote, "the bland exterior – like the unreadable poker face – is often the perfect smoke screen, hiding your intentions behind the comfortable and familiar. If you lead the sucker down a familiar path, he won't catch on when you lead him into a trap." – 48 Laws of Power by Robert Greene. ++ the criminalization of dolls is a well camouflaged trap.

Quote, "There are very few men – and they are the exceptions – who are able to think and feel beyond the present moment." – Carl von Clausewite, 1780-1831. ++ Very few people are able to see what the oppression of dolls will transform into.

Quote, "The most ordinary cause of people's mistakes is their being too much frightened at the present danger, and not enough so at that which is remote." – Cardinal do Retz. ++ The present danger will be the heinous criminal activity of a sick man – the remote will be the removal of Freedom of Speech and the enslavement of the entire nation.

(Explanation of 21st Law – Return Property)

We are focusing on innocent until proven guilty and the right to a fair trial which requires the ability to defend yourself. By taking a person's assets, the police can inflict extreme hardship, financial loss and expense, and deny a defendant the ability to defend themselves. If you take their car, they can't go to work or must rent or purchase a new car. The same is true of many things. If the police take enough, they can completely cripple a person: no phone, no computer, no car, no furniture, no dishes, no clothing. Do you get it yet? Our goal is to force the police to simply return the property.

Unfortunately it is not that easy. There is some stuff we do not want them to return. Obviously we will not return the money they stole from the bank, but how do we determine this? So we defined categories: chemist, judge, jury, everything else. Each of these four categories cover a specific type of property. A chemist is obvious; we use a professional expert to make the determination. The three remaining are a scale of easy, hard, and very hard. A judge's assessment is easy. "Hey judge, we don't want to return this," – prosecutor. "Okay, what's the excuse?" – Judge. As a result, this is a very narrow list, not just a weapon, but one owned by a convicted felon. Notice counterfeit money is here, but counterfeit products are not. Money is intended to include money orders, bank checks, stamps, stocks and other currencies which are counterfeit. This is key. It in no way covers real money, real money orders, real bank checks, real stamps, etc. Of course the next item is stolen property where the true owner can be identified. Thus, a thief with a hundred dollars (even if you know he stole the money, but you don't know who from), the police cannot keep it. Why? Because if you don't know who it was taken from, then the truth is you don't know it was stolen. I now envision a scenario where the police bust a ring and seize a truckload of stolen property from hundreds of unidentified victims. Well the police have three months to identify as many as they can. This is intentional. As a victim, I want my property back. I envision a lost & found style police recovery website where victims can identify stolen property and search the database.

Next, "something produced by the commission of a crime." Money is produced by the crime of selling illegal stuff. The bookkeeping records, not the computer, are produced: however, if these records cannot be moved onto another computer, then the computer gets sucked in. This is like ink on paper. If I can't keep the ink without keeping the paper, then the police get to keep the paper. Of course, there is this mysterious and magical device called a copy machine that I could claim allows the police to keep the data and return the paper. Property that was theoretically purchased with money which was produced by the commission of a crime is not a product of the crime. It is only indirectly connected.

The next category is very hard: by a jury trial. This would require the prosecution to bring the case to trial within three months or start paying rent, or photograph documents and return the property with a lean to seize it again upon the determination of a jury. The right to bear arms puts weapons owned by non-felons in this category. All forms of pornography and child pornography fall into this category. I trust no judge with the capacity to know the difference between legal and illegal art. Something specifically used in the commission of a crime, this is strange because it would include the murder weapon, this sounds ridiculous until you do the math: A baseball bat – $7, a kitchen knife – $5, a handgun – $200. What is 10% of $200? Well $20. The conviction of an average gun charge will cost society between $100,000 and $300,000. If the object is important, simply pay the rent. Even a couple hundred dollars in rent is perfectly acceptable. Oh, but now we have a solid precedent that benefits the defendant and irrelevant property is not economical to keep nor does keeping the property sabotage the defendant's ability to function. I also want to point out if the police do their job and get the case to trial within three months, none of this matters.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 5th Amendment which reads, "no person shall . . .be deprived of . . . property, without [a conviction]."

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

Quote, "The tactic of strangulation is to deprive your opponent of the resources required to live, where upon neither innocence nor guilt matter." – M. J. Leonard

(Explanation of 22nd Law – Evidence for Appeal)

The function of the destruction of evidence used in trial is to hide an injustice and promote malpractice. In the case of drugs, I would expect the report from a chemist that identifies the substance. Evidence not used in trial is not bound by this law. The goal is to be able to recreate the trial. With this in mind, both the defense and prosecution may wish to add arguments and counter arguments that did not get included in trial such that if the case is appealed and areas perceived to be irrelevant become important, these arguments and counter arguments can address them. It should be obvious if the defendant is representing themself then this evidence must be available to them as they are their own attorney.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 1st Amendment which reads, ". . .no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech . . .".

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

(Explanation of 23rd Law – Curfew)

The goal is to protect the fundamental right to freedom of movement and assembly. Curfews, often imposed under the guise of public safety, can be abused to suppress dissent or control populations without just cause. This law ensures that any restriction on a person's liberty through curfew enforcement is heavily penalized, discouraging arbitrary or oppressive measures. Part A addresses detention or incarceration, while Part B targets financial penalties, amplifying the consequence to deter such fines.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 5th Amendment which reads, "No person shall . . . be deprived of . . . liberty . . . without [a conviction]."

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 1st Amendment which reads, ". . .no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech . . .".

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

(Explanation of 24th Law – FPS)

The Fine Payment Standard (FPS) establishes a robust mechanism to ensure fines, fees, or rewards mandated by the Laws of Ryvah are paid promptly and fairly. By requiring payment through certified mail invoices and imposing a high interest rate on unpaid balances, this law discourages delays or evasion by payers, including government entities or individuals. The escalation of responsibility to higher entities (employer, city, county, state) ensures accountability, while the non-taxable nature of payments protects the payee's compensation. The quadrupling of fines for national security-related violations targets potential abuses under such pretexts. The PA clause extends liability to arresting officers and lawmakers, aligning their personal accountability with the enforcement of unjust laws.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 1st Amendment which reads, ". . .no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech . . .".

Quote, "All government ought to be instituted . . . to enable the individuals who compose [the common wealth] to enjoy their national rights." – James Wilson.

Quote, "The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government – lest it come to dominate our lives and interests." – Patrick Henry

(Explanation of 25th Law – Solicitation)

This law protects freedom of speech by ensuring that charges of attempt or solicitation of a crime are only valid when both parties clearly understand the act as criminal. By requiring explicit identification of the crime and mutual understanding, it prevents vague or ambiguous accusations that could criminalize innocent conversations or negotiations. The exclusion of forced or unwilling conduct safeguards against entrapment or coercion. The fine for improper charges deters prosecutorial overreach, reinforcing the principle that speech, unless explicitly tied to a known crime, remains protected.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 1st Amendment which reads, ". . .no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech . . .".

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment and is a definition of a term required to achieve the 6th Amendment. "The accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

(Explanation of 26th Law – Verbal Testimony)

Verbal testimony is the least creditable type of evidence that is admissible in a trial. It changes on a whim and is frequently for sale to the highest bidder. Further, it deteriorates over time. The closer the testimony is to the event, the more accurate it is, and by the time it is three years away from the event it cannot be trusted. Compounding this is the impact emotions and fear can play on the mind. A hundred plus years ago, verbal testimony was used to convict women of witchcraft under the claim they had turned men into toads. Obviously it was an error then, just as it is an error today to trust verbal testimony. People get scared and their minds alter what they believe to be true. And, we have said nothing of malicious intent or greed. For these reasons, there must be an absolute statute of limitations on the admissibility of verbal testimony for the prosecution. If the criteria needed to render a guilty verdict was 51% to 49%, more probably than not, then this law would deny both prosecution and defense from using testimony over three years old. However, the criteria to reach a guilty verdict is 99% to 1%. Beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense only needs to establish a reasonable possibility the crime has not been committed by the defendant. It is the prosecution who must prove it, and prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. The idea that verbal testimony of events over three years old can meaningfully and credibly add to the prosecution's case is wrong.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

Quote, "Do not people talk in society of a man being a great actor? They do not mean he feels, but that he excels in simulating, though he feels nothing." – Denis Diderot, 1713-1784

(Explanation of 27th Law – Judges)

A judge who had more time as a prosecuting attorney than as a defense attorney is biased in favor of the prosecution and no longer requires the establishment of beyond a reasonable doubt. It is far less likely for a judge biased in favor of the defense to convict an innocent person, than a judge who is biased in favor of the prosecution.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

Quote, "The current American Judicial System seems to have incorporated some of the worst parts of both trial by combat and trial by ordeal." – Melody A. Kramer

(Explanation of 28th Law – Coercion)

A. The term "their" is reflexive back on the juror, witness, or defendant and is specific to them. In other words, if a witness is misinformed of the witness's rights, if a juror is misinformed of the juror's rights, if a defendant is misinformed of the defendant's rights, – it is not the cartesian product. Our goal here is to stop coercion, stop the malicious lies about what the law actually says, and to punish those who spread the lies.

B. No more threats. A threat is a consequence which causes harm. The statement, "If you don't file a restraining order against that man, I'm going to get CPS involved and they may take your child," should be answered with, "Will you be paying your fine with cash, check, or charge?" Never talk to a law enforcement officer without a hidden recorder.

C. Putting a stop to another form of witness coercion.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

Quote, "Creativity involves breaking out of established patterns in order to look at things in a different way." – Edward de Bono. ++ True, but coercion is not creativity; it is criminal activity. It is not creative to look at an innocent man as guilty; it is immoral.

(Explanation of 29th Law – Term Limits)

Real simple, this imposes a 15 year term limit on the sum of time as a policeman, sheriff, deputy, judge, and prosecutor. Time as a defense attorney, private investigator, etc. Does not add to the sum. I cannot really envision a job as policeman where they never arrested, investigated, searched, detained, ticketed, processed, questioned, prosecuted, or presided over a defendant, but just in case someone else can, the intent is to include them, too. After 15 years they need to find a new job.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

(Explanation of 30th Law – One Hundred Person Survey)

The concept of defacto law is a relic from a time when people could not read. Laws were not written, and if they were, they were not written clearly. We are no longer in an era where the English competency of our lawmakers is so poor as to need defacto laws. As such we declare all defacto laws null and void.

Fundamentally, the 100 person survey holds all law to a level of clarity as to be understood by a minimum of 95% of the people who read them. Before Ryvah, the ambiguity and vagueness of law empowered the law to attack innocent people indiscriminately with callus impunity. With the 100 person survey ambiguity and vagueness will cripple those laws and force the law makers to write them with clear and concise language. Of course, that will open them up for Constitutional challenges where the law depends on ambiguity to hide its unconstitutionality. The 100 person survey will also be instrumental in conjunction with challenging a law by establishing what people think it means.

Let us take a look at some of the key points of the survey. I expect the third party company to survey well over 100 people in an exact order. Such that, if an individual who took the survey were disqualified, there would be a backup. So maybe 130 people. Next we reserve the right to redo the exact same survey. The questions must be identical. Note: It is up to the first third party company to define the question with the council of an attorney, probably the defense attorney. The prosecution can do nothing but get a new batch of people to take it. Of course, if your survey just barely hits 94% (below 95%) then it is risky to think you will get the same or better result. A result that would allow you to feel safe doing the act described in the survey would be closer to 85% with a solid 15% concluding it ambiguous.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 5th Amendment which reads, "No person shall . . . be deprived of . . . liberty . . . without [a conviction]."

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 14th Amendment which reads, "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens . . . nor deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Ambiguity is a violation of due process.

Quote, "The first and fundamental rule in the interpretation of all instruments is to construe them according to the sense of the terms and intentions of the parties . . . its nature and objects, its scope and design." – Joseph Story.

(Explanation of Law 31 – Pornography)

A. Child pornography laws first defined child pornography as: sexually explicit conduct. This sounds pretty good and each of these three words conveys a powerful meaning. First, sexual: must have something to do with sex. Second, explicit: a clear and concise understanding – not suggestive. And third, conduct: Action, not inaction. The sales pitch continues with a very clear and precise list of extreme actions that further restrict the definition: genital–genital sex, genital–anal sex, genital–oral sex, masturbation, bestiality, and the second to last is sadistic or masochistic abuse. So far so good. At this point I am loving this law. All of these forms would logically inherit all three conditions of the core definition; thus they must be explicit and depict conduct. In the case of sadistic or masochistic abuse, it would inherit sexual also. Therefor, an image of a child cutting her own arm (masochistic abuse) falls short of "sexually explicit conduct." Ahhh, but they slipped in one last form: a lascivious exhibition of the pubic area. Now, Title 18, Section 2256, which defines child pornography goes to great effort to also define the following terms; minor, producing, organization, visual depiction, computer, graphic, and even indistinguishable. However, they have intentionally and maliciously omitted a definition of lascivious counting on the hope most jurors will not know what it means. Now, the Merriam-Webster dictionary defines lascivious as: Lustful -> unbridled sexual desire, or lecherous -> inordinate indulgence in sexual activity. Oh, but this is not the definition the courts instruct jury members to use. Because lascivious does not have a legal definition, the courts think they can fabricate one. The fabricated definition includes: 1. images that focus on the pubic area or have it in the center of the image; 2. images that have sexually suggestive settings; 3. images that have unnatural poses; 4. images that depict inappropriate attire; 5. Partial nudity or nudity; 6. If the image suggests coyness or flirtation; 7. If the image is intended to illicit a sexual response in the viewer; 8. If the customer might use the image for sexual gratification; 9. And even if the image had been advertised inappropriately.

All nine of these considerations would each be considered unconstitutionally over broad and a clear violation of our First Amendment rights which is why they have been omitted from the definition of child pornography. They are intentionally evading a constitutional challenges. You need to fully realize with this definition a child need not be nude. Any image that meets any one of these considerations can be called pornographic. People are being convicted of child pornography for photos of fully clothed children on playgrounds. They are being convicted for child pornography for photos of children in swimsuits. People are being convicted for photos of children in clothing that does not fit right, people are being convicted for photos of sleeping children. These nine considerations have fully circumvented every aspect of sexually explicit conduct. An image no longer needs to be sexual. It no longer needs to be explicit, and it no longer needs to depict conduct. Worse than that, it circumvents the restriction to the pubic area. The law says, "lascivious . . . pubic area . . . " Thus, they have circumvented the restriction to the pubic area. Virtually all images can be deemed pornographic. Now if you're not scared yet, let me convey to you the Muslim religion is over a billion strong globally and is the fastest growing religion in America and we could see a point where all photos of children not in a full burka are deemed child pornography and all your family photos deleted from all the genealogy databases, effectively removing you from history.

Is this an over reaction? Are we really at risk of all child beauty pageants, gymnastics, and home dance videos being classed as child pornography? Consider these facts. In 1925 the painting by Maxfield Parish "Day Break", which depicts a full nude ten-year-old girl was so widely accepted and loved a reproduction of the image was in 25% of all American households, making it the most poplar image of its time. Child nudity was simply commonplace. By 1945 it had diminished only slightly and the US military used an image of a bare-breasted woman to recruit soldiers for the war and junior high schools still hosted plays of Adam and Eve where the two junior high school students were nude in front of family, classmates, and faculty. In 1970-71 the famous photo from the Viet Nam war of a ten-year-old full frontal nude girl was on the front page of the New York Times newspaper and won a Pulitzer Prize. In 1978, the child pornography laws were passed. In 1986, United States V. Dost was the first use of the nine considerations. In 2020 the implementation is so unconstitutionally broad, just about anything can fall into its jaws. The progress is very clear. Because the last four generations failed to protect their freedoms, they were taken away.

B. This is intended to prohibit the misuse of the word and prohibit its erosion, it would cover porn, porno, pornographic, pornography, the plural form of these words, and all compound phrases including one of these words.

C. First, only lawyers can give legal advice. We must stop the lies and malicious misinformation which is eroding our freedom of speech.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 1st Amendment which reads, ". . .no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech . . .".

Quote, "The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you control the people who must use the words." – Philip Dick. ++ Thus, we cannot allow anyone to ever alter the meaning of a word.

(Explanation of 32nd Law – Prosecutorial Discretion)

This law addresses the abuse of prosecutorial discretion, where charges are filed not because of clear criminal conduct but to pressure defendants into accepting plea deals out of fear of excessive punishment. The requirement for a judicial review ensures an impartial check on prosecutorial overreach. By imposing a significant fine, this law deters prosecutors from using their authority to harass or intimidate, reinforcing the principle that justice must be based on reason and evidence, not coercion. The 14-day ruling period ensures swift resolution to prevent prolonged harm to the defendant.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 14th Amendment which reads, "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens . . . nor deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

Quote, "The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience." – Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.

(Explanation of 33rd Law – Mandatory Body Cameras)

Body cameras are essential for transparency and accountability in law enforcement interactions. Part A ensures officers cannot selectively avoid recording encounters, protecting civilians from unchecked authority. Part B safeguards the integrity of evidence by requiring long-term preservation and penalizing tampering. These measures prevent misconduct, such as false reporting or evidence suppression, and provide defendants with reliable records for their defense. The fines reflect the severity of undermining public trust and judicial fairness.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 5th Amendment which reads, "No person shall . . . be deprived of . . . liberty . . . without [a conviction]."

Quote, "Justice is truth in action." – Benjamin Disraeli.

(Explanation of 34th Law – Right to Public Trial)

The right to a public trial is a cornerstone of a fair judicial system, ensuring transparency and preventing secret proceedings that could hide injustice. This law penalizes courts that unjustly limit public access, whether by excluding spectators, denying live streaming, or delaying transcript release. The requirement for a documented, narrowly tailored reason prevents arbitrary closures. The fine serves as a deterrent, reinforcing the public's role in holding the judiciary accountable and protecting defendants from covert abuses.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . public trial, by an impartial jury."

Quote, "Publicity is justly commended as a remedy for social and industrial diseases. Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants." – Louis D. Brandeis.

(Explanation of 35th Law – Speedy Trial Enforcement)

Prolonged pretrial detention violates the right to a speedy trial, causing undue hardship and eroding trust in the judicial system. This law establishes a clear timeline for trial commencement, penalizing courts for delays not attributable to the defendant. The escalating fines and potential dismissal of charges incentivize efficient judicial processes, protecting defendants from languishing in limbo. This reinforces the principle that justice delayed is justice denied, ensuring timely resolution of cases.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

Quote, "Justice delayed is justice denied." – William E. Gladstone.

(Explanation of 36th Law – Presenting Evidence)

This law ensures defendants can fully present their understanding of laws and definitions without judicial obstruction, promoting transparency and fairness. Part A penalizes courts for prohibiting defendants or their attorneys from referencing laws, dictionaries, or examples, ensuring clarity in legal proceedings. Severe fines for arresting or disbarring attorneys protect zealous advocacy. Part B safeguards the defense's right to present evidence that discredits witnesses, countering false or inconsistent testimony. Part C establishes a lower evidentiary threshold for the defense, recognizing the prosecution's higher burden of proof. It protects specific types of evidence, especially the defendant's own statements, to ensure their narrative is heard. These measures prevent judicial overreach and uphold the defendant's right to a fair defense, prioritizing justice over procedural barriers.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

Quote, "The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge, but imagination." – Albert Einstein.

(Explanation of 37th Law – Speedy Trial)

This law strengthens the right to a speedy trial by imposing strict timelines and penalties for delays. Part A fines courts for failing to resolve charges or start trials within 90 days for competent defendants or two years for incompetent ones, provided the defendant has a clean attendance rekord. This prevents prolonged detention without progress. Part B limits statutes of limitations to one year plus the crime's maximum punishment, penalizing arrests beyond this period. These measures protect defendants from indefinite legal limbo, ensuring timely justice and deterring prosecutorial procrastination that undermines fair trials.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial."

Quote, "Procrastination kills. If you want to destroy or stop something, simply postpone it, over and over." – M. J. Leonard.

(Explanation of 38th Law – Discovery)

This law ensures complete transparency in the discovery process, granting defendants and their attorneys full access to all evidence available to the prosecution. By mandating a tablet with unalterable, high-quality digital copies of evidence—including photos, recordings, and data from seized devices—it prevents selective disclosure or manipulation. The requirement for timely delivery within one week, backed by daily fines, compels prosecutors to act swiftly. Special provisions for tablet access, such as 24-hour power for incarcerated defendants or a 100-foot activation beacon for those not in custody, ensure practical usability. This law upholds the defendant's right to be fully informed, leveling the playing field and safeguarding against prosecutorial misconduct.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to . . . be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation . . . ".

Quote, "You know as well as we do, that the standard of justice depends on the equality of power to compel." – Delegates of Athens, 416 BC.

(Explanation of 40th Law – Plea Deals)

This law discourages the use of plea deals, which can be coercive and undermine justice by pressuring innocent defendants to plead guilty out of fear. By fining prosecutors for offering plea deals, it aims to eliminate their use as tools for psychological intimidation or expediency. While plea deals can save time in certain cases, their potential for abuse—convicting the innocent or obscuring the truth—outweighs their benefits. This measure reinforces the right to a full trial, ensuring convictions are based on evidence, not fear or convenience.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 7th Amendment which reads, "the right of trial by jury shall be preserved."

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 8th Amendment which reads, "[no] excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 14th Amendment which reads, "No state shall . . . deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

Quote, "Kill 'em all and let God sort them out." – Medieval Origins from a Crusader in 1209.

(Explanation of 41st Law – Legal Definitions)

This law eliminates ambiguous or unwritten laws by mandating that undefined legal terms rely solely on definitions from the three most widely sold dictionaries. It prevents judges from imposing their own interpretations, which can lead to arbitrary or biased rulings. Fines for non-compliance and instructions for juries to disregard improper judicial comments ensure adherence. By standardizing definitions, this law promotes clarity, fairness, and predictability in legal proceedings, protecting defendants from vague or weaponized laws that undermine constitutional protections.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 1st Amendment which reads, ". . . no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech . . . ".

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through Section 9, paragraph 3, which reads, "No bill of Attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed."

Quote, "No more unwritten laws. No more defacto laws." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 43rd Law – Gender/Race Equality)

This law promotes fairness in sentencing by allowing defendants to challenge penalties that appear disproportionate based on gender. By requiring comparison to ten similar cases involving opposite-gender defendants, it ensures equitable treatment, adjusting for relevant factors like act severity while excluding irrelevant ones like criminal history. The one-month judicial review deadline, enforced by fines, ensures timely action. Transparency in documenting sentencing rationales further supports accountability. This law aims to eliminate gender-based disparities, fostering equal protection under the law and public trust in judicial impartiality.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 14th Amendment which reads, "equal protection of the laws."

Quote, "Justice is blind, and so must our sentencing be to gender and race." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 44th Law – Free Speech)

This law robustly protects freedom of speech across a wide range of expressive activities, provided no direct harm (e.g., plagiarism, vandalism, or injury) occurs. It penalizes government agencies for arresting or fining individuals or businesses over protected content, such as religious or political views, with substantial fines to deter censorship. The exclusion of verbal abuse and the allowance for communicators to protect sources balance free expression with public safety. By safeguarding diverse forms of speech and art, this law upholds constitutional freedoms and prevents government overreach into personal expression.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 1st Amendment which reads, ". . . no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech . . . ".

Quote, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." – Voltaire.

(Explanation of 45th Law – Annoy)

This law protects individuals from arbitrary arrests for vague offenses like "annoying" or "offending" without a documented loss, such as disturbing the peace or disrupting a public space. It clarifies that personal discomfort or disagreement with someone's behavior does not justify legal action unless quantifiable harm is proven. By fining courts for such arrests, it deters abuse of vague laws and reinforces the need for clear, evidence-based charges, safeguarding defendants' rights to due process and fair treatment.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

Quote, "The term 'annoy' is extremely vague and ambiguous." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 46th Law – Jury Selection)

This law prevents judges or prosecutors from excluding jurors based on their education or expertise, which can bias juries against defendants presenting complex or technical defenses. By fining inquiries into jurors' degrees or certifications, it ensures knowledgeable individuals, better equipped to evaluate evidence, are not systematically removed. This promotes impartial and competent juries, countering tactics that favor showmanship over substance and protecting the defendant's right to a fair trial by a capable jury.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

Quote, "We want experts to be allowed to serve as jurors." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 47th Law – Permits)

This law eliminates financial barriers to obtaining permits, licenses, or certifications by prohibiting government agencies from charging fees. It shifts the cost to the general fund, ensuring access is based on merit, not wealth. By promoting higher-quality testing and supporting small businesses and talented individuals, it fosters economic opportunity and innovation. This measure aligns with the broader goal of promoting general welfare, ensuring equitable access to opportunities without compromising regulatory standards.

Quote, "The dream of owning and running your own business belongs to everyone." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 48th Law – Abuse, Harm)

This law clarifies the definitions of "abuse" and "harm" to prevent overbroad or vague charges that do not reflect actual harm. It requires that such charges involve both a negative overall impact and specific, tangible effects like loss, humiliation, or injury. By fining courts for improper arrests, it protects defendants from unjust accusations, ensuring charges are grounded in clear, measurable harm. This promotes fairness and precision in legal proceedings, safeguarding against abuse of authority.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

Quote, "We are simply enforcing the definition of terms." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 49th Law – Beyond Reasonable Doubt)

This law codifies a stringent definition of "beyond a reasonable doubt," ensuring convictions require the prosecution to disprove all defense scenarios with robust evidence, such as scientific data or credible testimony meeting five strict criteria (insistent, consistent, persistent, untainted, complete). It protects defendants by fining courts for convictions based on lesser standards and deems prohibited defense evidence as established, mandating a not guilty verdict. This reinforces the high burden of proof on the prosecution, safeguarding against wrongful convictions.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

Quote, "It is better to fail to convict 99 guilty men than to convict even one innocent man." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 50th Law – Three Days of Deliberation)

This law establishes that jury deliberation exceeding three days inherently indicates reasonable doubt, as prolonged discussion suggests unresolved defense scenarios. Fining courts for each additional day incentivizes efficient trials and protects defendants from convictions where doubt persists. By setting a clear threshold, it minimizes weak charges and ensures verdicts reflect certainty, upholding the principle that extended deliberation signals an inconclusive case, warranting a not guilty outcome.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

Quote, "Reasonable doubt has now been irrevocably established." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 51st Law – Suspension of Service)

This law protects unconvicted incarcerated individuals from losing their assets and services due to inability to manage finances during detention. By placing insurance, loans, services, and support payments into hibernation, it prevents interest, fees, evictions, or service discontinuations. Courts cover these expenses, ensuring defendants can return to their lives post-release without financial ruin. Fines for non-compliant organizations or courts enforce accountability. This measure safeguards against the disproportionate harm of pretrial detention, preserving property and stability for the innocent until proven guilty.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 5th Amendment which reads, "no person shall . . . be deprived of . . . property, without [a conviction]."

Quote, "Punishment should never include the destruction of all the defendant's worldly assets." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 52nd Law – Probation)

This law aims to eliminate parole, registration, and probation by fining courts weekly for imposing them, arguing they create unequal legal standards for different groups. Such measures often impose restrictive rules that undermine equal protection, particularly for ex-convicts, compared to other citizens. By penalizing their use, the law discourages practices that perpetuate disparate treatment, promoting a single, fair legal framework for all and reducing post-conviction burdens that hinder reintegration.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 14th Amendment which reads, "equal protection of the laws."

Quote, "We cannot allow multiple sets of laws." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 53rd Law – Violence)

This law defines "violent" strictly to prevent its misuse in describing lesser acts, such as yelling or minor battery, which do not cause significant physical harm. By requiring specific injuries—like bruises over an inch, broken skin, burns, or eye damage—it ensures the term is reserved for serious offenses. Fining courts for misapplication deters exaggerated charges, protecting defendants from inflated accusations while maintaining protections for victims of true violence, thus ensuring fair and precise legal proceedings.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

Quote, "The term violent is being misused." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 54th Law – Legal Consistency)

This law prohibits using immutable or personal characteristics—race, gender, lineage, DNA, criminal history, or psychological diagnosis—to define criminal offenses, ensuring equal treatment under the law. Fining courts for such practices deters discriminatory legal standards that unfairly target specific groups. By reinforcing impartiality, it protects defendants from biased prosecutions, promoting a justice system where offenses are judged by actions, not inherent traits, thus upholding constitutional guarantees of fairness.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 14th Amendment which reads, "equal protection of the laws."

Quote, "Stating the obvious, but sometimes it is in the failure to protect what we perceive to be immutable we find our greatest weakness." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 55th Law – Altering Evidence)

This law imposes strict accountability on law enforcement for altering or misrepresenting evidence, a severe violation of justice. By fining courts when any defendant is affected by such misconduct—regardless of the case—it aims to remove offending officers from service and deter future tampering. This protects the integrity of judicial proceedings, ensuring evidence is reliable and defendants are not wrongfully convicted due to fabricated or distorted proof, aligning with fair trial principles.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

Quote, "One of the greatest crimes is to bear false witness against a defendant." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 56th Law – Own Real Property)

This law restricts real property ownership and related loans to U.S. citizens and citizen-owned organizations, aiming to protect national sovereignty over land. By voiding non-citizen loans as of January 1, 2025, it ensures foreign entities cannot control U.S. real estate through financial leverage. This measure safeguards domestic interests, preventing external influence over critical assets and promoting economic stability for citizens, aligning with the broader goal of national welfare.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the Preamble which reads, ". . . in order to . . . promote the general welfare . . . ".

Quote, "Only U.S. citizens should control the nation's land." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 57th Law – Privacy)

This law robustly protects privacy by defining a "subject" with inherent privacy rights, excluding criminal or emergency contexts. It categorizes invasions by organizations, imposing fines for unauthorized surveillance, recordings, or data misuse, with stricter rules for non-service providers (Type A) and nuanced protections for service providers (Types B and C). A public service clause allows contracted privacy waivers with fees, ensuring transparency. By targeting government and large organizations, it curbs systemic privacy violations, reinforcing constitutional protections against unreasonable searches.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 4th Amendment which reads, "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated."

Quote, "The poorest man may, in his cottage, bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown." – William Pitt, 1763.

(Explanation of 58th Law – Consent)

This law upholds the fundamental right to consent, fining courts for ignoring a conscious individual's permission in matters involving drugs, mutilation, delays, proceedings, or death. Part B specifically prohibits government agencies from administering psychoactive substances without informed consent or a targeted court order, covering vaccines, water additives, and food preservatives. By requiring full disclosure of side effects, it ensures transparency, protecting personal autonomy and preventing government overreach into individual decision-making, a cornerstone of constitutional liberty.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 4th Amendment which reads, "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, . . . shall not be violated."

Quote, "A government may never say 'I grant or deny permission' for you." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 59th Law – Privacy of Property)

This law protects the right to own personal property without mandatory disclosure, fining agencies that penalize non-reporting with the property's value, ten times the original fine, and an additional AIPY. It prevents governments from using disclosure as a pretext for taxation or seizure, thwarting tyrannical asset grabs. By ensuring privacy in property ownership, it safeguards against unjust deprivation, aligning with constitutional protections and promoting individual security in personal effects.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 4th Amendment which reads, "the right of the people to be secure in their . . . papers, and effects, . . . shall not be violated."

Quote, "Virtually all tyrannical governments wish to rob the people of their property." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 60th Law – Self Incrimination)

This law protects against self-incrimination by fining courts for compelling testimony against oneself or family, recording attorney-client meetings, using silence as guilt, employing jailhouse informants, or reusing testimony in later cases. Each measure ensures defendants can defend themselves without fear of coerced or misused statements, safeguarding confidentiality and fairness. By imposing substantial fines, it deters prosecutorial tactics that undermine the right to remain silent and a fair trial, reinforcing constitutional protections.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 5th Amendment which reads, "No person shall be . . . compelled . . . to be a witness against himself . . . ".

Quote, "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt." – Maurice Switzer, 1907.

(Explanation of 61st Law – Information)

This law mandates government transparency by requiring agencies to release documents over 15 years old within two weeks, with fines for non-compliance or lost documents. It ensures public access to historical government actions, including secret activities, to hold officials accountable. The 15-year statute of limitations extension for concealed crimes enables prosecution of past misconduct. This promotes an open, trustworthy government, aligning with the constitutional oath to uphold justice and accountability.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through Article II, paragraph 8, the oath, which reads, "I do solemnly swear [to] . . . preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution . . . ".

Quote, "If we want a good government, it must be held accountable and we must be able to see everything." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 62nd Law – Miranda)

This law enforces Miranda rights, requiring law enforcement to inform individuals of their right to counsel and silence during arrest or questioning post-warrant. Fines for non-compliance deter violations, ensuring defendants are aware of their protections against self-incrimination. This safeguards fair treatment during arrests, reinforcing constitutional guarantees and preventing coercive interrogations that could lead to unjust convictions.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 5th Amendment which reads, "No person shall be . . . compelled . . . to be a witness against himself . . . ".

Quote, "The Miranda rights." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 63rd Law – Witness for the Defense)

This law ensures defendants can present their case by compelling courts to honor witness subpoenas or provide jury access to the request, fining non-compliance. It guarantees defendants' rights to cross-examine prosecution witnesses within reasonable limits and ensures defense witness expenses are covered. These measures prevent judicial obstruction, uphold the right to obtain favorable witnesses, and promote a fair trial by allowing defendants to fully present their defense, no matter how unconventional.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "The accused shall enjoy the right to . . . have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor . . . ".

Quote, "A defendant must be capable of presenting its case, no matter how ridiculous." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 64th Law – Voting)

This law ensures equal voting rights for all U.S. citizens over 18 by mandating voter validation to prevent fraud, such as fictitious voters or vote modification. The SRRVS enables internet-based voting with accessible stations at public facilities and transparent, reconcilable results organized by geographic clusters. Fines for denying voter registration deter disenfranchisement, protecting the democratic process and ensuring every citizen's voice is equally heard, in line with constitutional voting protections.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 15th Amendment, Section 1 which reads, "the right . . . to vote shall not be denied . . . ".

Quote, "All votes from all U.S. citizens shall be equal." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 65th Law – Inheritance)

This law protects individuals from penalties related to inheritance, such as taxes or seizures, by imposing heavy fines on agencies that enforce such measures. It addresses disparities where wealthy individuals exploit loopholes while others face burdens, ensuring inheritances remain untaxed and unconfiscated. By safeguarding property rights, it prevents government overreach, aligning with constitutional protections against deprivation of property without due process.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 5th Amendment which reads, "no person shall . . . be deprived of . . . property, without [a conviction]."

Quote, "The poor and middle class should not bear the burden of inheritance taxes." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 67th Law – List of Patriots)

This law bans the creation of a "list of patriots," viewing such lists as potential target rosters for assassination or oppression by a tyrannical government. By prohibiting their existence, it protects individuals who defend liberty from being singled out, safeguarding their safety and freedom. This measure reinforces the right to liberty, preventing government misuse of data to suppress dissent or undermine constitutional protections.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 5th Amendment which reads, "No person shall be . . . deprived of . . . liberty . . . without [a conviction]."

Quote, "A list of patriots is a list of targets." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 68th Law – Treason)

This law protects defendants who act against politicians or prosecutors enforcing unconstitutional laws, fining judges who deny self-defense claims unless a jury unanimously agrees the law is constitutional. It aims to deter officials from enacting or upholding unconstitutional laws by invoking fear of public backlash, such as minor symbolic acts or, in extreme cases, severe actions. The high burden on the defense to prove unconstitutionality ensures careful application, aligning with the people's right to resist tyranny.

This is linked to the Declaration of Independence which reads in Paragraph 2, "whenever any form of government becomes destructive . . . it is the right [duty] of the people . . . to abolish it."

Quote, "Our goal is to invoke a deep fear of righteous vengeance against those who erode our Constitution." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 69th Law – Medical)

This law protects doctors, patients, and parents from penalties for providing or requesting medical procedures or substances, including controversial ones like euthanasia or illegal drugs, when approved by two doctors and persistently requested by the patient. Substances must be fully consumed in the doctor's presence. Fines deter courts and medical boards from interfering, reducing the FDA to an advisory role and prioritizing patient autonomy and the Hippocratic oath, while maintaining malpractice liability.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 4th Amendment which reads, "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, . . . shall not be violated."

Quote, "A licensed doctor has pledged a Hippocratic oath to do no harm and protect the patient." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 71st Law – Right to Record)

This law protects the right to record conversations in which one is a participant, fining officers, prosecutors, and judges for penalizing such actions, unless the judge dismisses the case. It ensures individuals can gather evidence to uncover truth, preventing authorities from suppressing recordings to hide misconduct. This promotes transparency and justice, aligning with the right to a fair trial by enabling defendants to document interactions critical to their defense.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

Quote, "The ability to obtain the truth is vital." – Anonymous.

(Explanation of 72nd Law – Reasonable Notice)

This law prevents surprise prosecutions by requiring prosecutors to disclose non-professional witnesses and their discovery two weeks before trial, with fines for non-compliance. It ensures defendants have adequate time to research and prepare, promoting a fair trial by avoiding ambushes that could undermine the defense. This measure reinforces due process, ensuring transparency and equality in legal proceedings, despite noted reservations about its strictness.

This is linked to the U. S. Constitution through the 6th Amendment which reads, "the accused shall enjoy the right to a . . . trial, by an impartial jury."

Quote, "There can be no leeway to allow surprise prosecutions." – Anonymous.