From another thread (useful in this Group):

Ok, good.

The BAR was kept by the people themselves, against the Profitable Monopoly (criminal gang counterfeiting government), and Thomas Jefferson does not spell it out well. A Grand Jury (volunteers, not government agents, or rather not State employees) keeps the gate, and it is not a BAR. That device (Grand Jury, democratic, republican, federal, device, not National, State, Corporation, Legal Fiction counterfeit device) known as a Grand Jury has a rich history, and it was developed naturally out of past versions of laws (very few) common to regular people: the common law, not the Common Law Trade Mark Counterfeit.
Here:

"It is a matter well known, and well understood, that by the laws of our country, every question which affects a man's life, reputation, or property, must be tried by twelve of his peers; and that their unanimous verdict is, alone, competent to determine the fact in issue. If then, you undertake to enquire, not only upon what foundation the charge is made, but, likewise, upon what foundation it is denied, you will, in effect, usurp the jurisdiction of the Petty Jury, you will supercede the legal authority of the court, in judging of the competency and admissibility of witnesses, and, having thus undertaken to try the question, that question may be determined by a bare majority, or by a much greater number of your body, than the twelve peers prescribed by the law of the land. This point has, I believe, excited some doubts upon former occasions but those doubts have never arisen in the mind of any lawyer, and they may easily be removed by a proper consideration of the subject. For, the bills, or presentments, found by a grand Jury, amount to nothing more than an official accusation, in order to put the party accused upon his trial: 'till the bill is returned, there is, therefore, no charge from which he can be required to exculpate himself; and we know that many persons, against whom bills were returned, have been afterwards acquitted by a verdict of their country. Here then, is the just line of discrimination: It is the duty of the Grand Jury to enquire into the nature and probable grounds of the charge; but it is the exclusive province of the Petty Jury, to hear and determine, with the assistance, and under the direction of the court, upon points of law, whether the Defendant is, or is not guilty, on the whole evidence, for, as well as against, him. You will therefore, readily perceive, that if you examine the witnesses on both sides, you do not confine your consideration to the probable grounds of charge, but engage completely in the trial of the cause; and your return must, consequently, be tantamount to a verdict of acquital, or condemnation. But this would involve us in another difficulty; for, by the law it is declared that no man shall be twice put in jeopardy for the same offence: and, yet, it is certain that the enquiry, now proposed by the Grand Jury, would necessarily introduce the oppression of a double trial. Nor is it merely upon maxims of law, but, I think, likewise, upon principles of humanity, that this innovation should be opposed."

Those are the words of Thomas M'Kean
RESPUBLICA v. SHAFFER, 1 U.S. 236, 1788
1 U.S. 236 (Dall.)
Court of Oyer and Terminer, at Philadelphia
February Sessions, 1788

These words:
"It is the duty of the Grand Jury to enquire into the nature and probable grounds of the charge; but it is the exclusive province of the Petty Jury, to hear and determine, with the assistance, and under the direction of the court, upon points of law, whether the Defendant is, or is not guilty, on the whole evidence, for, as well as against, him."

Unlike the potentially misleading words of Thomas Jefferson, the words here prescribe a gate worthy of keeping, and keeping in the hands of the least likely to be biased.
On one side of the gate are regular people, which includes the most dishonest and least discrete among us, as well as the most honest and most discrete among us. This group on this side of the gate is everyone, the whole people, the public as a whole, the public thing (respublica).

On the other side of the gate are intended to be (an adaptive, grass-roots, moral, natural, organic, intention) hand-picked members of an elite group among the whole people, those few who constitute the least dishonest and most discrete people among us, those willing to work without PROFIT (could receive compensation?), who are then elected into a pool of Elite, for the purpose of assembling a Grand Jury in any case where a member of the people seeks government power to put an accused member of the people in front of the people as a whole: face a jury in a trial by the country, a trial by jury, a trial proceeding according to the common law, a.k.a. brought to justice by the injured party, or by someone representing the injured party: anyone.
Side note (side bar?):

A common law judge (actual not counterfeit) is duty-bound to inform everyone of the facts that are relevant in a common-law court case. An Equity Court Judge (actual or counterfeit) can make up on the fly how the case will proceed, as the judge alone assumes all jurisdiction whatsoever in each case in his or her court. The same arbitrary power is assumed by Admiralty, Exchequer, Maritime, "Family," or other "Court Judges," in their "Courts," according to legal fiction dogma. According to legal fiction dogma the lesser court judges make less money. The higher up in the pyramid these legal fiction "Judges" go, the more loot they keep in their individual accounts. I have yet to find, but I can theorize the possibility that common law judges were only these magistrates, and not until the exchange of compensation for Public Duty became "profit," was there any question as to "regular and uniform" bias, among judges.

So take anyone, a slave for example, and imagine the point in time and place where the injured party gains access (equal footing) to the law power, and then describe that point in time and place where that injured party first gains access to the law power: to remedy, to restore, to redeem, or if the perpetrator is deemed worthy of punishment by the country through their juries, then punishment is adjudicated and executed by officers employed for that purpose.

That point is not a call to 911, or if it is then the operator ought to direct the call to a member of the pool from which a Grand Jury would be formed. That is if the caller is not currently in need of physical defense against an immediate threat to life, liberty, or property. A whole storyline can be imagined at this point, but the point here is that contact point.

Now imagine that the slave is a victim of a legal fiction crime, and put a name on the slave, such as anyone concerned about the murder of Lavoy Finicum. It can be anyone representing the whole people, anyone at all, and that one is then put in time, and in place, in contact with the law power: a member of the pool from which a grand jury is formed.

Note that what can be is not what is in place, since a government agent misknown as a Prosecutor has in his exclusive power a "Grand Jury," in most (if not all) usurped counties in U.S.A. Inc. (LLC). People are not allowed to access common law proceeding through a grand jury, rather people are routinely misdirected away from that common law proceeding.
Note:

"In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law."

That is important, something I can return to in The Judiciary Act of 1789 (previous to the Bill of Rights amendments), and so-called "saving to suitors."

Who determines the rules of the common law? Certainly not an Equity Judge (legal fiction). See for example Thomas M'Kean. Jurisdiction (determining facts and law) return to the people themselves, or not, at the discretion of the people themselves: so-called democracy, so-called republicanism, and so-called federalism actual, not counterfeit.

I, me, myself, you, anyone, goes to the individual in place in the pool from which a common law grand jury will form in any case deemed worthy by those in command of that county criminal or civil jurisdiction: see Thomas Jefferson.

Do you know any honest and discrete people who are at least somewhat familiar with the rules governing the common laws of free people in liberty? Ask them what they would do with your case if your case is the Conspiracy Murder of Lavoy Finicum?

How ignorant are we, as a people? How defenseless are we by that measure? How ripe for exploitation are we?

How safe are our children when the pedophiles run the most powerful criminal gang as yet to disgrace the human species?

Abigail Adams to John Adams Braintree, Mass., March 31, 1776
"I have sometimes been ready to think that the passion for liberty cannot be equally strong in the breasts of those who have been accustomed to deprive their fellow creatures of theirs. Of this I am certain that it is not founded upon that generous and Christian principle of doing to others as we would that others should do unto us. . . . "