A prosecuting writ is the necessary condition to prosecute a citizen lawfully in the law court. But only with a prosecuting writ is not the sufficient condition to prosecute a citizen lawfully in the law court.
A prosecuting writ is kind of official document according to which the judicial establishment had the decision held by the law court to mandate the legal action followed for the citizen to be trialed. A prosecuting writ is a mandate similar to an executive order coming from the legitimacy power, a prosecuting writ is a decision held by the law court and should be obeyed by the subject it is ruling. When we say that an order or a legal action based on written law which is ruling by the judicial establishment is in itself against certain Constitution provision, is that the prosecuting writ or the judicial establishment itself acting to violate that certain Constitution provision?
When all the necessary legal elements for consisting a crime are lacking but with a prosecuting writ to bring the citizen to trial, the conflict could be lie in that how the judicial establishment to hold an opinion which makes all these necessary legal elements supposed to be lacking to be taken as existed or becoming existed. Perjury or forged evidences about these legal elements can have something to do with it, and that perjury could be coming from the plaintiff, the law enforcement, or even the legal establishment itself, though when we are doubting the legal establishment in itself it is defying the logical rules making up the logic itself. But we can view such a phenomenon or vision as kind of perjury, which turns the nonexistence elements into existence, which is making up all those necessary legal elements for consisting the crime. Perjury in the judicial establishment itself is the behavior lacking disciplinary regulation, which could be imposed reprimands or could be required discipline by the supreme court.
David Chang, SSN057-86-4042,
August 31, 2012,
National Central Library,