know thy rights

Know Thy Rights

Fellow Patriots,

This book is not yet finished and is incomplete regarding many issues. You are, however, free to use the information that has already been compiled here! I have approximated the percentage of completion for each chapter, as is seen in the Table of Contents.

We are always trying to improve this resource, so if you have any ideas, comments, or suggestions we would greatly appreciate hearing from you. We would also be grateful for any briefs which you might have on subjects which are new or do not yet have briefs prepared.

If you find something you don't understand, contact me! Some stuff in here might not make sense by itself, it’s just something that will trigger a thought and remind me of something. So don't hesitate to ask if it doesn't make sense. Oh, and if there is something which you find hard to believe, just contact me, I will be more than happy to show you the evidence supporting my claim.

Yours in Christ, Zach Doty [email protected]

Know Thy Rights of 37

Table of Contents

Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................................... 2

Preface .......................................................................................................................................................... 3

Warning ......................................................................................................................................................... 5

Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 6

Freedom ........................................................................................................................................................ 8

Getting Free ................................................................................................................................................ 10

Confrontations ............................................................................................................................................ 14

Court ........................................................................................................................................................... 17

Choosing Your Arguments ...................................................................................................................... 19

Arraignment ............................................................................................................................................ 26

Trial ......................................................................................................................................................... 27

Post‐Judgment Strategies ........................................................................................................................... 32

Staying Free ................................................................................................................................................. 34

Prepared Briefs ........................................................................................................................................... 35

Post Script ................................................................................................................................................... 37


Preface We believe that God Almighty is the Sovereign Creator of Mankind, and the Savior of His chosen People. He alone, as the divine Godhead, holds all Power and Authority. We believe that God has ordained three institutions; Family, Church, and State. We respect and obey Lawful and Biblical Government, but we must hold the line where God has drawn it. We must stand in firm opposition to any civil government that dares to usurp authority not granted by God and/or the Constitution. There exists no earthly authority except that which is granted by Sovereign God of the Universe.

We live in a country that has rebelled against Theonomic authority and turned from God to secular humanism. In so doing they have removed the foundation of absolute truth (Right vs. Wrong). They have removed prayer and scripture from schools, and as a result, they have had to add metal detectors in response to the sharp increase in crimes. They have removed God's laws for marriage (The Ten Commandments) from schools, and built abortion clinics to accommodate the huge rise in unwed pregnancies (by murdering the defenseless child). In short, they have removed the only firm basis for moral convictions, replacing the conscience with consequences. No longer is murder a crime because God said "Thou shalt not murder", instead it has become a violation of some man‐made statutory code. They have lowered the significance of Malum In Se to that of Malum Prohibitum, thus removing the distinction between good and evil.

We live in a country that went bankrupt in 19331 and was declared so by President Roosevelt in the "Trading with the Enemy Act".2 The ever‐rising national debt is over 9 trillion; if this debt were to be paid off, every single family would have to pay over $135,000.

We live in a country where officials are using purported Emergency and War Powers against the government’s own Body Sovereign, i.e., the American People. According to Senate Report 93‐549, the Emergency and War Powers Acts have rendered the American Constitution fully suspended and obsolete.

We live in a country where public schools have secularized and emasculated the upcoming generations by usurping the father’s role in child training. We live in a country where children are being deliberately dumbed down and "programmed" to accept big brother’s plans for a socialist society.

We live in a country where treasonous men have completely removed lawful money (Gold and Silver coin) from circulation, replacing it with a fiat “currency” which is printed for 2¢ per bill by the US Treasury for a private corporation (the "Federal" "Reserve") then loaned at interest to the government. This fiat currency is backed by absolutely nothing...except for the general deception of the populace.

We live in a country that unlawfully taxes its citizens beyond comprehension, then prints more "fiat money" out of "thin air" and creates an uncontrollable tax through inflation; a nation where taxes are

1 See Executive Orders 6073, 6102, 6111, and 6260. In addition, See Senate Report 93‐549, pages 187 & 594. 2 Sixty‐Fifth Congress, Sess. I, Chs. 105, 106, October 6, 1917; codified at 12 U.S.C.A. 95a


nearly three times the divinely condemned tax of 20 percent that the tyrant Pharaoh imposed on the children of God.

We live in a country where civil government has given private corporations illegal monopolies. The B.A.R. association has monopolized all judges and attorneys. The Federal Reserve (which really isn't any more “federal” than the “Federal” Express) has been given the monopoly on printing “money” for their private gain.

We live in a country where it is illegal to house the homeless, feed the hungry, preach the word of God, get married, or even work without a license; despite the fact that they are clearly commanded in scripture (except marriage). We live in a country where some things commanded by scripture (to discipline your children and hate evil) have been made completely illegal and are not even allowed under license. Remember, anyone who grants a license can refuse to grant it, or revoke it once granted.

We live in a county that does not judge but rather condones adultery, murder of the innocent (abortion and now even euthanasia), sodomy and blasphemy.

Yes, we live in a country where civil government has gotten out of hand. We live in a nation that is legalizing sin, while at the same time infringing upon every right we have. The question is: Where do we draw the line? When is enough, enough? How bad does it have to get? What is your freedom worth? Where is the spirit of patriotism that founded this great nation and gave us our independence? Where are the brave souls who are willing to throw tea into the harbor? Where are those bold men who would give their lives for principle and freedom? Where is the courage that prompted fifty‐six men to sign a declaration of independence, knowing it was equivalent to signing their own death warrant? Where are the valiant warriors who will fight for a just cause?

Is America too far gone? Have all men become cowards? Is there no one who will take a stand for truth? Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Folks, we have a patriotic duty ‐‐ nay, a Christian duty ‐‐ to preserve our precious freedom, whatever the cost. The duty is ours the consequences are God's.

We have written this book to open your minds to the truth by showing you the facts, to encourage you to fight for your God‐Given rights, to show you the Biblical methods and justifications for resisting, to equip you with information and knowledge that will help you in doing so, and most importantly, to strengthen your faith in Jesus Christ. Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free; and remember, you were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men.

May God Bless You! Zach Doty

"I will walk at liberty: for I seek thy precepts." Psalms 119:45


Warning Unless raptured, everyone will eventually die, and that includes you. Some of you will die as cowards, some as slaves, and some as men. Some of you will die in hiding, some in shackles, and some in defense of their Faith, Family and Freedom. Some of you will be remembered with scorn, some with pity, and some with honor, respect and admiration.

Exercising your freedoms in defiance of tyrannical government may be hazardous and will likely result in loss of life, limb or property. All information provided shall be used at the individual's own risk. Consequently, the author will not be responsible for any injuries or fatalities incurred by use of the information described herein.

Failure to exercise your freedoms in defiance of tyrannical government is extremely hazardous. Such behavior will inevitably result in the loss of life, limb, property and dignity. All temporary comforts, benefits and securities provided by tyrannical government shall be used at the individual's own risk. Consequently, the author will not be responsible for the injuries and fatalities incurred by your cowardly ways.

Reading this book will likely result in loss of ignorance. Ignorance, once lost, cannot be re‐gained. All side‐effects are permanent and cannot be reversed.

You should not contact the BSM (Bureau of Slave Management) for approval prior to reading. Doing so may result in undesirable side effects including, but not limited to: Harassment, Persecution, Ridicule, Mockery, Scorn, Disdain, Derision, Inconvenience and Discrimination.

If you have been diagnosed with HSS (Happy Slave Syndrome), you may find that you have allergic reactions to this substance. Allergic reactions may include, but are not limited to Shock, Surprise, Astonishment, Distrust, Amazement, Bewilderment, Confusion, Excitability, Uncertainty, Panic, Disorientation, Horror and Dismay. Avoid operating a motor vehicle while reading this material.

A persistent refusal to believe that your government is wrong may be a sign of a serious condition. If your blind loyalty to corporate bureaucracy persists for more than a week, tends to recur (VERY unlikely), or is accompanied by other side effects, consult your Savior and ask for guidance.

Other side effects, not hitherto mentioned, which may accompany the reading of this book include Liberation, Salvation, Joy, Deliverance, Knowledge, Wisdom, Understanding, Freedom and Liberty.


Introduction I cannot free a slave who loves his chains, so I won't even try. Nor will I attempt to deny the tranquility of servitude or the bliss of ignorance. The fact is, freedom is not free; and until our Lord Jesus returns, it never will be. However, if you truly desire to lead a free life, unfettered by the tyrannical laws of despots, if you are willing to pay the price, then this book is for you.

This book is designed to be a straight‐forward manual, a handbook which will help you reclaim, defend, and preserve your liberty, in the de facto "court" system we have today; but it is by no means a silver bullet. If a judge has decided to convict you, he will convict you; there really isn't much you can do about it except to pray. However, as Christians we must decide why we fight. Is it to win, or is it to stand for truth, justice, and freedom. If our goal is merely to win, we will lower ourselves to the level of our opponents and trade principle for comfort. However, if we desire the later, if we value the eternal above the temporal, we must surrender the outcome to God's will, and stand firm. For it is better to be convicted by man, than to violate our conscientious convictions. It is better to be judged of the world, than to stand in the judgment of the sovereign God.

This book will outline dozens of solid, factual, logical, arguments, and provide you with briefs that have already been prepared for your use. However, this manual is somewhat general and does not go into great detail regarding specific scenarios. In writing this book, we have attempted to be as generic as possible; however, there are several basic arguments included which are specifically tailored to certain situations. For example, some of the arguments outlined here are applicable only in cases involving the IRS, Federal Reserve, Right to Travel, or Allodial Land Ownership and some are applicable only within certain states (e.g., States with multiple Constitutions, etc.). If you need more information regarding a particular issue, please contact us for material pertaining to your specific situation. We are currently working on several different handbooks, and hope to have them ready for publication soon.

I have not attempted to prove with this book any of the assertions made herein. Instead, I have laid out the facts as concisely as possible, focusing mainly on the chronological ordering of the information. If you doubt any claims, arguments, premises, or other assertions made by this book please refer to the corresponding brief or contact me directly for clarification and additional proof. When you go into court, you do not want to go half‐cocked. This book is intended mainly as a reference sheet; something that can be used as a game plan to keep your defense strategy organized and outlined; something that serves as an index and syllabus for your arguments and briefs. This guide will enable you to attack each and every point of your opponents case without missing a beat! That is the main goal of this publication.

This book presupposes a general understanding of law and legal terms. If you are new to the legal arena and unfamiliar with legalese we recommend keeping a law dictionary handy while reading this book, you may also want to read Blackstone's Commentaries on the Law.


Most of the codes, cases, and constitutional cites in this book are from The State of Washington. Nevertheless, the general principles of fundamental common‐law rights apply everywhere and in every state.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man and brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." ‐ Mark Twain


Freedom Freedom is a rare and precious thing. Something that, as we know it, is never free, never cheap. A wise man once said that the value and price of freedom was "Every drop of sweat, every ounce of pain, every pint of blood...paid in advance." It is hard to put it better than that. However, today I am here to tell you of another freedom, a freedom that is truly free. That is, freedom in Christ. Jesus Christ came to preach the gospel to the poor, to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised (Luke 4:18). Without Christ in your life, you are living in bondage, spiritual bondage to sin. But where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty (2 Corinthians 3:17). Whosoever shall call upon the name of the lord shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God (Romans 8:21). Ye have been called unto liberty. Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage (Galatians 5:13,1).

To understand law and liberty, one must first understand the law of liberty, that is, the Law of God, or the Divine Law. This perfect law is united to the Law of Nature, yet it is, in some respects, to be distinguished from it. The Law of God is the supreme spiritual fountain, out of which the stream of the natural and physical law flows. If the connection between this fountain and this stream is cut off, the latter quickly becomes stagnant, corrupt, and contemptible. For this reason, man must perpetually appeal to the voice of God sounding in his conscience; otherwise, his conscience itself becomes cauterized, and seared by the influences of physical things, and the abominations of time and sense. Hence, the holy scriptures perpetually speak of the Law of God, as far superior to the law of nature. "The law of the Lord, says the Psalmist, is perfect, converting the soul; blessed are they who walk in the law of the Lord. As for me, my delight is in the law of the Lord, and I meditate thereon day and night." On the other hand, we are warned by the inspired writers not to give too much reverence to nature, however excellent in itself; because after all, it is but an external stream, a thing outwardly generated and born, a mere picture of the infinite reality. Though no one therefore values the law of nature more than we do, we would avoid taking it as our standard,—we would avoid a mere natural and physical morality; for, as the poet says, "he builds too low, who builds beneath the skies."

You can never lead a truly sovereign life unless you are son to the King of Kings, Lord of Lords and Sovereign of Sovereigns! As William Penn once wrote "Men must be governed by God or they will be ruled by tyrants." James Madison spoke of the same in his Memorial and Remonstrance (A.D. 1785) when he said, "It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator such homage, and such only, as he believes to be acceptable to him. This duty is precedent both in order of time and degree of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society. Before any man can be considered as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe."

Abigail Adams understood this same truth, for she said, "A patriot without religion in my estimation is as great a paradox as an honest Man without the fear of God. Is it possible that he whom no moral obligations bind, can have any real Good Will towards Men? Can he be a patriot who, by an openly


vicious conduct, is undermining the very bonds of Society?...The Scriptures tell us "righteousness exalteth a Nation." John Adams, her father in law, said, "We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

Before you can expect freedom, before you can expect to live in liberty, you must first give your life to Christ. Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it (Luke 17:33). In Christ, you will be free, even while in chains. You might not be free physically, but you will be free spiritually.

Tyrants can take my life, but they can never take my liberty in Christ! The very act of taking my life shall liberate me from this body of flesh and blood. Though they may slay me, yet will I rise again, to an inheritance which is incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for me (1 Peter 1:4), fear not the tyrant who can slay the body, but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell (Matthew 10:28).


Getting Free One of the major mistakes made by patriots is waiting until the last minute before breaking their bonds of servitude with the corporate government. It is essential that you break all contracts with the government as soon as possible. Therefore, in this chapter we will give you a systematic guide showing you how to obtain a truly sovereign capacity as a lawful Christian man!

The first and most important thing to do is terminate all contracts with the corporate government. Few realize that contracting with the government exceeds minimal contacts, and grants them jurisdiction. Whether the contract is a Marriage License, Social Security Number, Welfare, or even a Birth Certificate, they all place you in subjection to the corporate codes, statutes, ordinances, and by‐laws governing those specific issues; they all have fine print, stipulations, or some sort of snake in the grass. Fortunately, all of these contracts between you and the government are retractable and can be terminated; they were signed under fraudulent pretenses and are therefore void ab initio. All you need to do is send in a Verified Notice of Termination!

Notices of termination should be divided into four parts; (1) notification of your termination, (2) authority for your termination (fraud, etc.), (3) negative averments, and (4) declaration of standing, capacity, and character. The Notice of Termination should be signed, sealed (right thumbprint), witnessed, notarized (by at least two notaries if possible), apostilled, bonded (with lawful money), and sent by Registered Mail (not Certified Mail) return receipt requested. You will need to keep a verifiable copy handy for future jurisdictional issues.

The negative averments should be designed to place the burden of proof upon them, make them prove jurisdiction, make them prove you cannot rescind your signature. If they cannot, will not, or do not object, they wave it by tacit agreement. Remember, their whole game is built on presumptions. Break their presumptions and put the burden of proof where it belongs, on them.

The declaration, which concludes the notice of termination, should declare your standing, capacity, and character. It should state who and what you are. A lawful flesh and blood Man, created in the Image of God, and saved by the propitiating Blood of His Son!

You have the right to political choice. Your citizenship and domicile are part of that political choice. Exercise this right, and if they ever attempt to restrict your political choice, challenge their political jurisdiction.

Though it is essential that you terminate all contracts with the corporate government, Social Security is the most important. Social Security is the one that places you in subrogation and voluntary novation, thereby impinging upon your rights.

The Social Security contract may be terminated for the following reasons:

1. It was fraudulently acquired, and it is therefore void ab initio (i.e. from the beginning.)


2. If you were automatically signed up at birth (as many people are), the contract becomes voidable (not void, you have to void it) when you come to the Age of Majority.

3. It violates public policy by subjecting the user to subrogation. 4. 20 CFR 404.1905 allows for the termination of Social Security. 5. SSA‐521 Withdrawal of Social Security Application. 6. IRS form 4029: Application for Exemption from Social Security Taxes and Waiver of Benefits.

These authorities should be more than enough to emancipate anyone from the Slave Surveillance Number (Oops, a Freudian Slip, I accidentally called it what it is!).

For your convenience, we have already prepared a lengthy termination document.3 After you terminate the Social Security contract they can still keep "your" Socialist Security Number in their records, the number is technically theirs, not yours. However, the notice of termination will break any assumptions that you accept responsibility as trustee for their fictional trust.

Without breaking free and terminating these contracts, you have no standing in court. Once you have terminated all your contracts with corporate government, you will have broken free of their jurisdiction and restored your legal standing. In fact, you may now challenge jurisdiction on the basis of Minimal Contacts!

Worried about getting a job or bank account without a SSN? Don't be. If any agency requires, but is unable to cite the law requiring, a common numeric identifier, you are entitled to a $1000 summary judgment. (Note: this applies only to government agencies. However, all state‐created corporations are government agencies) We have prepared several documents which will assist you in securing bank accounts or loans without a Socialist Security Number, see chapter 10 for more details.

To understand how a Marriage License, Social Security Number, Welfare Agreement, or Birth Certificate restricts your freedom it is first necessary to understand legal trusts. A trust exists when each of the following are present:

1. Trustee 2. Beneficiary 3. Res/Corpus

Whenever these three required elements exist, the law presumes and creates a trust automatically. In this case, the elements are as follows:

1. Trustee ‐ You 2. Beneficiary ‐ Corporate Government and the Bankers 3. Res/Corpus ‐ Any property held by the trust. This could be a vehicle, a home, or a firearm, even our

labor. Anything registered in the name of the trust.

3 This document is on the Compact Disk (CD) that accompanies this book. More information is available at the end of this book.


It is obvious that legal implication has created a trust anytime you register property in the name of a legal fiction. All the essential elements are present so for legal purposes this is a state‐created trust.

There are many different types of trusts in law. There are bare trusts, constructive trusts, discretionary trusts, express trusts, fixed trusts, hybrid trusts, implied trusts, inter vivos trust, irrevocable trusts, offshore trusts, private and public trusts, protective trusts, pure trusts, resulting trusts, revocable trusts, simple trusts, special trusts, testamentary/will trusts, unit trusts, and more. In this case, we are dealing with a constructive trust.

The Settlor (aka Trustor/Creator) of this trust is the corporate government. Generally, a government agency creates this trust deceitfully by your tacit consent on forms or applications. It is essential that you rescind your signature on these documents. The title of this trust is usually similar to your name, but spelled in all capital letters, and with an initial, instead of a middle name. The trust's title is its "DBA", so to speak. This is where the fraud comes in, the trust's name is intentionally designed similar to the Sovereign's name so that the common Joe never notices the difference, or if he does, he doesn't realize the legal significance of the change.

For the most part, it is the trust itself, not the natural man, which is the object of legislation, and therefore we are technically sovereign in this land. I say technically because while the codes and procedures of the legal system are specifically worded to exclude you in your sovereign and individual capacity, the practical application is that they disregard the rules. They are so accustomed to trustees (sovereigns) who ignorantly accept the name of the trust as an alter ego, thereby coming under the plenary power of the courts. Remember, the fictitious trust is state‐created and therefore state‐controlled.

The problem is that the objects of our travel, and labor, etc. are the beneficial property of the system, we cannot use them in the manner we think proper without offending the beneficiary. Therefore, in reality, we are free to travel. However, the car we try to travel in is, or was at some time, registered. By the act of registration, the title is bifurcated, because we always register it in the name of the trust. We end up with legal title and the state retains equitable (beneficial) title; this creates a constructive trust, an artificial entity governable by statute.

If you terminate this trust and reclaim equitable ownership, you will now have both legal and equitable ownership. Legal and Equitable ownership combined is true Allodial ownership. Remember, the trustee has legal authority to transfer the property of the trust; if he transfers the property to himself the ownership is no longer bifurcated and the trust ceases to exist.

Licenses are never granted to Sovereigns (not that they couldn't be, they just aren't). They are in the name of the ens legis (artificial) "person" who will be engaging in the privileged activity. The adhesion to the Sovereign is indirect. The Sovereign is liable as a fiduciary to the person whose equitable property he is in possession of. This fiduciary relationship is the snare by which we are trapped, not the license itself. If the Sovereign were to obtain an automobile whose title was absolute, (Allodial), he could then travel as a matter of right and the statutes regarding commercial enterprise by artificial entities would be inapplicable.


In addition to creating a trust, Social Security is also a contract. There are many contractual obligations involved, but, contrary to what you might think, the obligations rest exclusively on you; they have no legal obligations in this contract, it is a one‐sided agreement.4

Nevertheless, Social Security is a contract; you just aren't the beneficiary of that contract. There are many obligations in the Social Security contract, but the main obligation is fiduciary. The most significant obligation of the Social Security contract is your agreement to accept responsibility, as trustee, for the trust. You have agreed to be a substitute, someone who pays the penalties for the state‐created fiction, this places you at the mercy of the court. This obligation places you in subrogation and novation without your fully informed Consent.

A trust by itself does not damage your personal standing, it merely bifurcates the Allodial title of your property, making you a mere user. In contrast, the contractual obligation of the Social Security contract is much more far reaching, as it effectually nullifies your persona standi in judicio.

To understand exactly how this works we must realize that trusts are "fictions of law", and legal fictions have no standing in court. The Social Security contract makes you surety for the trust. If trusts are at the mercy of the court, and you are responsible for the trust, then you are at the mercy of the court. (Actually, this statement might be false, because it implies that they have mercy!)

A license is not a contract, in and of itself. However, the licenses issued by today's corporate government create trusts, and most have contractual obligations. Have you ever wondered why the licensee must sign the license? This would not make sense if it were merely permission. It is more than mere permission, there is a trust created, and there are contractual obligations you agree to when signing your license. Believe me; they seriously impinge upon your liberties.

For more information on how to free yourself from past convictions please see Chapter Eight, Post‐Judgment Strategies.

4 This was made clear in FLEMMING V. NESTOR 363 U.S. 603. In this case, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that paying into Social Security confers no property rights to benefits. It really does not matter how long you pay or how much you pay, they do not have to give you one red cent in return.


Confrontations Most police officers and other government agents are extremely sly talkers, and very good at entrapping people with their own words. So prepare yourself for future encounters and make sure you know your rights. Most importantly, you must remember always to keep cool and think steady, don't get too excited, and remember, think before you speak! You are under arrest and on trial as soon as you are restrained of your liberty. The officer making a stop is the judge, prosecutor, and hostile witness against you. Whatever you say, can and will be used against you in their court; so exercise your right to remain silent, he cannot force you to speak. You can be assured that he is making a recording of any conversation that he is trying to have with you; especially if you have a "high profile”, (experience is a great teacher!).

Legally speaking, the officer has "arrested" you by restraining you of your liberty (i.e. pulling you over); and therefore he should read you your rights before asking ANY questions. Unfortunately, most police are unaware of the law and won't read you your rights unless taking you into custodial arrest. NEVER rely on tyrants to inform you of your rights.

Because the officer is in a commercial business venture with the corporations that they work for, i.e. city, county, state, or federal jurisdictions, you want make sure that you have them identify themselves and ask them whom they work for and for one of their business cards. By law, they have to have a business card or you could be dealing with a highwayman, or someone impersonating an officer of the law. So make sure you have the police prove their identity. If you can, you should also carry a Public Servant Questionnaire with you; you can demand that they fill it out before they ask you any questions. If they refuse to fill it out, you may use that as proof that they were operating in bad faith.

Keep an audio recorder handy when you can, just make sure you keep it concealed; if the police see it, they will probably confiscate it. Recorders are cheap in today's economy and well worth buying. When its your word against the cop's word a recorder will help straighten things out! Police usually record the conversation for their benefit, but don't count on getting access to their recording, unless you were in the wrong. If you do not have an audio recorder with you, ask the police if he is recording the conversation. If he is, state, "For the record, I hereby challenge your jurisdiction and demand proof of your authority." If he is not, ask him to turn it on for court record.

Even if you have a recorder running, you should have the officer put anything that might be crucial to your case in writing and have it signed. That way you won't have to worry about the evidence being admissible in court. This is a rule of thumb, which should be applied everywhere, not just to traffic officers; always get public servants to communicate in writing, doing so will ensure a reliable and admissible trail of evidence, which can be annexed to your affidavit as proof!

When the cop asks you for your Drivers License, you can simply hand him your Family Bible and state that, "this is My Law, which is the Word of God, and in My Law, I can do all things in Christ Jesus which strengeneth Me, for I am not out here hurting or damaging anyone."


The first thing that you should do in any confrontation is determine if you are under arrest; simply ask the officer "Am I under arrest, or am I free to leave?" The typical response to this question is "Neither, I am merely detaining you." For this reason, I suggest you familiarize yourself with some of the case law regarding this issue. The law is very clear, if you are not free to leave, then you are under arrest.

After you have established this fact, you can determine your course of action. If you are free to leave, then you might as well leave. And if you are under arrest, then invoke all your rights and stand your ground, being careful not to do or say anything which might give him jurisdiction.

The first thing that you should do when he informs you that you are under arrest is to ask the question "Why?" Remember, there are only three answers he can give you:

1. I have a valid warrant. 2. I have probable cause to believe you have committed a felony. 3. I witnessed you commit a malum in se misdemeanor with my own eyes.

If he answers with one of these, ask for more details, ask to see the warrant, or ask him to articulate exactly what crime you committed. As soon as he informs you that you are under arrest demand that he show you a valid warrant, or bring you directly to the nearest magistrate for a probable cause hearing. Inform him that, should he refuse, he will be guilty of kidnapping, false arrest, assault and battery, and will be sued in his personal capacity; if the officer asks, "Is that a threat?" respond, "No, it is a lawful notice and promise."

If he asks you questions, demand council (not representation) and exercise your right to remain silent. Even if his questions seem innocent, they probably are not. Remember, never dignify his charges with recognition, and do not treat his accusations as if they were valid. Instead, you should tell him "Your paperwork is void and shall be abated summarily."

Answer questions with more questions, just like Jesus did (Mark 11:29, Luke 20:3); and if you want to have some fun, read him his rights and watch the expression on his face! Turn the tables on them.

If he asks you to sign any papers, ask him if your signature is voluntary or mandatory. If voluntary, simply respond, "I do not choose to volunteer". However, if mandatory, question him further and ask what he will do, should you refuse. If he says "Nothing", you should politely decline his offer and refuse to sign them. If he threatens to take you into custody, kick you, beat you, or shoot you, you may sign them, but be sure to write "TDC/ARR" right with your signature (Close enough so it can't be whited out). TDC stands for Threat, Duress and Coercion, ARR stands for All Rights Reserved; any contracts signed under those conditions are null and void ab initio. Remember, the codes (RCW) don't even require that you sign the ticket. (See STATE v. REDING, 119 Wn.2d 685, 688, 835 P.2d 1019, September 10, 1992. RCW 46.64.015.)

If you are a Christian, you may sign documents in the name of Jesus the Christ. For Holy Scripture commands that whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus (Col 3:17). If they ask who you are, inform them that your identity is irrelevant, because you are merely an


ambassador (2 Co 5:20, Eph 6:20). Remember, we are crucified with Christ: nevertheless we live; yet not us, but Christ liveth in us: and the life which we now live in the flesh we live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved us, and gave himself for us (Gal 2:20). As many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God (Rom 8:14); so don't be bashful to claim your rights as a son of the Sovereign King of kings! Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth (Rom 8:33)! More on this later.

If you are raided by machine‐gun‐toting Special Agents sporting fashionable new Kevlar body armor and black ski masks you might not want to argue; there is no reason to get physically roughed up, thumped on, or shot at. Likewise, if a police tells you not to jaywalk there really isn't any need to dump the whole load on him. Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison (Mat 5:25). Just use your head. There is a time to talk, and there is a time to keep silent. It is much easier to avoid trouble than to get out of trouble. So if it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men. (Romans 12:18)

When being booked into jail, demand that the jailor show you a valid mittimus. If he refuses, inform him that you will hold civilly liable in his personal capacity for false imprisonment, should he continue to jail you absent lawful authority.


Court Today's courts are a far cry from those of early America. No longer are they governed by the principles of fundamental common law. Instead, they have become chancery courts, tribunals operating under civil law and military exigency, flying the admiralty/maritime flag, and invoking their jurisdiction on all who might come by. However, not all is lost...yet. Paper is still an effective weapon. For when the right issues are raised and when the right procedures are used, one may still find an honest verdict. But then again, success is not guaranteed, judicial tyranny does exist, to an extent unprecedented and unparalleled by American history.

One of the most important aspects of your defense is procedure. In today's courts, it is customary to assume that all necessity prerequisites have been met, and go directly to addressing the merits of the case. Though this may be a viable method of defense, in cases where one can win on such grounds, it is certainly not the only, and should not be recommended in certain situations.

The order in which pleadings should be made is well established and follows systematic logical reasoning. There are basically five different aspects which may be challenged by a pleading, and any one being used, it assumes, and therefore waves the right to challenge, all those preceding it. The common‐law ordering of such pleadings is as follows:

1. To The Jurisdiction Of The Court (In Personam & Subject‐Matter) 2. To The Disability Of The Person (Plaintiff's Standing) 3. To The Count Or Declaration (Charging Document) 4. To The Writ (Remedy Sought For) 5. To The Accusation Itself In Bar Thereof (Factual Allegations)

It therefore follows that in accordance with this ordering and the aforementioned principles, it is too late to file a dilatory plea after pleading to the merits of the case. It is therefore only logical to attack each and every subsequent point, to prevent, if possible, any necessity of arguing the merits of the case. So lets start at the very beginning, and work our way through the list; but before we do so, let’s examine Pleas in Abatement, it might be that we can stymie these charges before they ever get to a court, and before you even have to challenge jurisdiction!

There are many who believe that special appearances nullify a Court's jurisdiction. Technically, it should, under common law; but under emergency powers, it does not. Under "Martial Rule," Judges do whatever they want, whenever they want, and however they want ‐ just so long as they do not alarm the public or disturb the peace. Defendants usually grant jurisdiction without knowing it, because they never challenge the process that creates the jurisdiction. "Process" is perfected by "appearance," special or otherwise. Making any appearance joins you into the case and subjects you to their jurisdiction; any challenges to jurisdiction at this point are futile because jurisdiction is always granted to try jurisdictional questions, even if one goes to higher Courts. Just remember, the Court is not the building nor is it the Judge or anyone else. It is the paperwork. If the Court's paperwork is defective, there is no


Court and the case ceases to exist. So before you do anything, dispute the existence of the court and case via plea in abatement. Doing anything else waives this right; and under military powers, this can be fatal.

At this point, I should mention that pleas in abatement are merely a more thorough way of making a Refusal for Cause. If you are caught off guard without enough time to draft up abatement documents you may simply write "Addressee Is A Legal Fiction. Refused For Cause by Involuntary Trustee without Recourse to me" (assuming it is addressed to the fiction). However, in any other situation I would recommend fully abating the documents. Using the abatement process gives you an opportunity to explain their deficiency and enter an affidavit breaking their presumptions and establishing your capacity.

A (non‐statutory) plea in abatement, when used properly, creates a new case, where you become the demandant and the original plaintiff from the other case becomes the defendant. This plea in abatement is actually an order, directing them to correct fatal errors on their process/paperwork, i.e. misnomer, unlawful date, etc. This order is issued from your own court, which is a matter of right (See Magna Carta, Article 34), instead of from the military courts of corporate government.

Pleas in abatement are usually classified as dilatory pleadings because they give the opponent an opportunity to correct his errors and resume the case, but as we shall see later, military agencies, corporate government entities, and US citizens have no standing to even respond to common law pleadings in abatement. Therefore, in most case, they end up permanently stopping all further action.

Before using pleas in abatement, you must first determine whether the documents you are abating are void, or voidable. Pleas in abatement are most effective against void documents, but they can be used on voidable documents, you just have to void them first. Nearly all paperwork issued by the court system today is not only voidable, but void.

Use caution and exercise special care to make sure that you never do anything which might nullify your abatement by granting the court jurisdiction, don't ask the court any questions or favors, don't make any motions, don't make any appearances, don't file anything into the court (pleadings in abatement are served, not filed), don't post bail, don't do anything that even admits there is a case, refer to their paperwork as having been abated, it is not in effect until they correct their errors or appeal your order. Doing any of these things will join you to the case, and by joining into the case, you admit that there is a case and you admit that you are the (fictional) defendant; this converts your plea in abatement into nothing more than a demurrer.

There are only two kinds of criminal behavior; public wrongs, and private wrongs. In a public wrong, we the people are damaged. In a private wrong, a private Person is damaged. Public wrongs are "felonies", like Theft, Murder, Rape, Assault. Private wrongs include many things, contractual violations, misdemeanors (misdemeanors are violations of fiduciary obligations), assault, etc. Public wrongs are known as criminal. Private wrongs are known as civil.


In today's courts, there are no criminal cases; everything is civil. This is because corporate government is actually private. However, the government still pretends that some cases are criminal. Sometimes you may find that it is more profitable to go along with them and argue their side of the fence, because doing so will allow you to use certain arguments that wouldn't apply to civil cases. However, you may want to expose the whole scandal and show the court that it is actually a civil charge. Doing this will effectively stop most of the charges, as all civil claims must be based upon contractual disagreements or the injury of a party.

It is also important to understand that everything is commercial, even common terms have been deceitfully redefined to have commercial connotations. There are thousands of codes, cases, and various citations which could be used to substantiate such a statement, but 27 CFR § 72.11 is a good example which makes it abundantly clear.

Choosing Your Arguments

We will now give you a systematically organized list of different arguments. As mentioned above, pleadings should be used in an orderly fashion to avoid waving your right to use them. Here is the list: (Note: Each argument has a brief already prepared. If an argument confuses you, we suggest that you read the corresponding brief for clarification and authority of law. More information concerning these briefs is available at the end of this book.)

I. To The Existence Of A Lawful Court & Lawful Process 1. Defendant (Trust) is a Legal Fiction

i. Unable to Commit Crimes ii. Misnomer (Catch 22 argument)

2. Complaint Fails To State Time of Offence Properly i. The complaint must specifically state the time of the offence ii. The date and time must be spelled out iii. Document must specify the Christian era of time (anno Domini)

3. Wrong Location i. Document uses two letter state abbreviations, not lawfully recognized ii. Document uses zip code iii. Document uses "address" (commercial)

4. No Lawful State Seal i. A seal is, in essence, a signature; individuals use a signature, entities use a seal.

A state seal is the signature of the state. Therefore, any document done in the name of "The State of Washington", or "We the People" should bear the state seal.

5. Jurisdiction Not Pled On The Record


i. Citations in courts of limited or special jurisdiction must state on their face the facts in support of their jurisdiction; jurisdiction cannot be presumed, it must be plead. Courts of inferior or special jurisdiction are empowered to act by pleadings sufficient to invoke their judicial authority.

ii. The Superior Court is generally considered to be a court of General Jurisdiction. However, in recent years they have merged equity, law, and admiralty, thereby making creating a "special" jurisdiction.

6. Statutory/Infraction Actions Not Constitutionally Established i. As soon as the court is declared to be in session and your case is before the

court, ask the judge "Are the charges before this court criminal or civil?" If he says they are statutory, respond, "The Constitution for the United States of America does not recognize statutory law." If he states that the charges are criminal, ask him "Is it criminal under common law or contract?" If contract, they must present the contract. If common‐law, they must present your accuser.

7. I am a Constituent Member of the Sovereignty5 i. A Sovereign cannot be sued by an inferior unless he consents (This argument, in

some respects, depends upon arguments to the disability of the plaintiff) 8. Invalid Signature

2. To The Jurisdiction Of The Court 1. Plaintiff and Venue ("STATE OF WASHINGTON") a Private Corporation 2. Unratified Constitution

i. The 1878 Constitution is Valid; the 1889 Constitution is Invalid. ii. The 1889 Constitution did not specifically invalidate the 1878 Constitution. Prior

law governs. iii. This court operates under the 1889 constitution.

3. Territorial Code of 1881 is the Prevailing Law 4. Minimal Contacts 5. Violation of Separation of Powers

i. Attorneys are "Officers of the Court" and therefore members of the Judicial Branch. They cannot occupy offices in any other branch. For example, the Attorney General's occupies a position in the Executive branch. Many legislators are also attorneys.

ii. The Prosecuting Attorney is generally recognized as being an executive agent. The judge, a judicial officer, often substitutes for the Prosecutor/Prosecutrix in civil infractions.

iii. This argument should not be limited to attorneys; there are many other violations of the Separation of Powers doctrine.

6. Martial Law Jurisdiction Challenges i. Do not object to the admiralty flag, it is its proper place, in an admiralty court.

5 Yick Wo vs. Hopkins, 118 U. S. 356, A. D. 1886


ii. Show how the National Emergency is unconstitutional. 7. Judge an Esquire – Therefore Private

i. Recuse every judge who is a member of the BAR; esquires are not allowed to hold positions in government.

ii. "If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honor, or shall without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them." ‐ 13th Amendment (Passed by Congress May 1, 1810 ‐ Ratified December 9, 1812.)

iii. "No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time: and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office." ‐ Article I, Section 6, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution for the United States of America.

8. Scriptural Arguments i. Cannot pay 10% to civil government ii. Two witnesses required (Deu 19:15) iii. Ungodly rulers have no authority (Romans 13:1, 2 Samuel 23:2‐3)

9. District Court has Limited Jurisdiction i. Cannot hear criminal matters; cannot fine more than $100 in civil matter ii. District Court is not a "court of record". iii. District Court is not authorized to hear and determine misdemeanors or gross

misdemeanors by RCW 3.60.060. iv. District Court cannot hear civil infractions except by contract with the municipal

court. 10. Speedy Trial Violations

i. The American Bar Association’s Standards Relating to Speedy Trial (1968) was adopted by 19 states, Washington State being one of them. This act stated that the right to speedy trial had been violated if the matter was not tried as soon as was possible.

11. Person, Human and Individual – Redefined By RCW 12. Court Not In Session

i. If the judge and clerk neglect to declare the court "In Session" ask the judge "Presiding officer, is this court in session, or are you in chamber?" If he says that it is in session, inform him that no one has declared it to be in session. If he says he is in chambers respond, "I will not be willing to make any contractual agreements with you while in chambers".

13. Judicial Officers Cannot Study Law Independently i. They are only allowed to take the law as it is presented to them


14. Invalid Oath of Office – Not Judicial Officer i. "State" has incorrect capitalization. ii. “Constitution of the United States”, not "the Constitution for the United States

of America" 15. RCW Lacks Authority of Law

i. It Makes No Claim To Be Law. ii. It specifically disclaims authority of law. RCW 1.04.021 iii. The Washington State Supreme Court has said it is not the law. See PAROSA v.

TACOMA. 57 Wn.2d 409 at 415 (1960). iv. It claims authorization only by the (phony) 1889 Constitution. v. This RCW was revised, yet they have no authority to do so. The code reviser can

in no way change what the legislature decided. The code reviser is appointed, not elected, and furthermore, he is appointed by the governor, the executive branch!

vi. It is copyrighted and therefore private ‐ Public law CANNOT be copyrighted vii. I didn't receive notice that I was subject to the RCWs. viii. The RCWs do not cite an enabling act/law. Enabling acts are required by Article

2 Section 18 of the (phony) 1889 constitution, and Article VI Section 1 of the 1878 Constitution.

ix. Article 2 section 19 of the (phony) 1889 constitution says each law must have a heading so you know that there is only one subject. The Revised Code of Washington covers thousands of separate issues and cannot be endorsed by our legislature with one act.

16. No Injured Party i. Common law requires a corpus delicti except in cases of malum in se crimes.

17. Entering Courthouse Requires Waiver of Substantial Rights i. Defendant presumed innocent until proven guilty ii. This court cannot require me to enter the courthouse because doing so requires

that I waive right to bear arms. I do not wave this right. 18. Congressional Acts Since March 27 1861 Invalid

i. When the Southern states walked out of Congress on March 27, 1861, the quorum to conduct business under the Constitution was lost. The only votes that Congress could lawfully take, under Parliamentary Law, were those to set the time to reconvene, take a vote to get a quorum, and vote to adjourn and set a date, time, and place to reconvene at a later time, but instead, Congress abandoned the House and Senate without setting a date to reconvene. Under the parliamentary law of Congress, when this happened, Congress became sine die (pronounced see‐na dee‐a; literally "without day") and thus when Congress adjourned sine die, it ceased to exist as a lawful deliberative body, and the only lawful, constitutional power that could declare war was no longer lawful, or in session.

19. The State of Washington Not Part of United States


i. Although accepted under the 1878 Constitution, it was never admitted into the union under the 1889 Constitution.

20. Right to Remain Silent 21. Court Lacks Jurisdiction To Proceed In Rem (See Brief) 22. Judge Not State Officer

i. State Courts and Their Officers Have Federal Tax ID Numbers and Pay Federal Taxes. It has long been established in multiple rulings that the Federal Government cannot tax the salary of a State officer. Thus, the taxation of the salary of the judges of this court gives rise to the reasonable and rational inference that they are, in fact, not State officers.

23. No Valid Oath of Office Filed. i. Ask the judge "Sir, have you sworn to uphold the Constitution for the United

States of America, and the Constitution for the State of Washington?" If he answers "Yes", demand to see said oath. If he answers no, or if he refuses to answer, say "Let the record show that the presiding officer has refused to indemnify the Constitution for the United States of America and the Constitution for the State of Washington. Sir, You no longer have the right to sit on that bench." Then turn around and walk out the door. You should personally check to see if he actually has an oath of office on file before you challenge him in this regard.

24. Misidentification 25. Officer Violated The Law Before He Determined That An Infraction Occurred

3. To The Disability Of The Person 1. Plaintiff Lacks Standing to Bring Suit

i. Plaintiff is a United States citizen, and as such he has no persona standi in judicio. THE JULIA, 12 U.S. 181 (1814). NOTE: Although they have no legal standing, as beneficiaries they do have equitable standing, and can operate in courts of equity. So refusing to accept equity jurisdiction is a prerequisite to using this argument.

2. Complainant Unauthorized To Represent Plaintiff i. The Police Officer initiated an action on the behalf of the state, but he is not

licensed to practice law; and even if he was, he isn't the prosecuting attorney and therefore has no authorization to represent the plaintiff (STATE OF WASHINGTON) in this action.

3. Primary Witness Disqualified i. Peace officers cannot testify as primary witness in traffic infractions because

they are so naturally prejudice by the nature of their job. 4. Officer Is Not A Peace Officer

i. He has no commission with the state seal proving his office. ii. Must be signed by the [lawful] governor; see State Constitution

5. Only One Witness


i. The maxims of common law require that there be two witnesses; there is only one witness in this case, the police officer.

6. Plaintiff Failed To Properly Prosecute i. In civil infractions where the judge prosecutes the case

7. Plaintiff Is Not Authorized To Prosecute In Its Name i. It must prosecute in the name of "The People of the State of Washington". ii. "The style of all process shall be, "The State of Washington," and all

prosecutions shall be conducted in its name and by its authority." ‐ Article 4 Section 27 of the phony Washington State Constitution (1889).

iii. "The style of all writs and process shall be "The People of the State of Washington". All criminal prosecutions shall be carried on in the name and by the authority of the state." ‐ Article 8 Section 17 of the Washington State Constitution (1878).

4. To The Count Or Declaration 1. Essential Elements Not Listed

i. The charging document must itemize and enumerate all essential elements of the crimes it charges.

2. Facts Buttressing Each Essential Elements Not Alleged i. The charging document must specifically and distinctively assert facts

supporting each and every essential element of the alleged crime. If it fails to do this, it fails to charge a crime.

3. Complaint Served by False Arrest 4. Complainant Served the Process 5. Process is not Designated "Notice of Traffic Infraction".

5. To The Writ 1. Plaintiff Has Not Stated A Claim Upon Which Relief May Be Granted

i. He has demanded "dollars" which do not exist in today's market. 2. Cannot Require Signature under Penalty of Perjury

i. Only public servants must sign under Penalty of Perjury. 6. To The Accusation Itself In Bar Thereof

1. Evidence Obtained by Unlawful Arrest – Fruit of Poisonous Tree i. Pulling You Over Is Arrest ii. He Must Have A Valid Warrant, Suspect a Felony, or have Probable Cause to

Believe You Committed a Misdemeanor. 1. Warrant must have an affidavit attached 2. Warrant must be signed by a judge or a clerk, in a court of record 3. Warrant must bear the seal of the court

iii. The arrest was made due to an alleged infraction of code, which is civil, not criminal.

iv. The officer had no 'public safety" concerns when he pulled me over. (Check his police report to ascertain his intent) Always offer to fix alleged safety hazards


(for example, if a headlight was out, offer to stop and fix it.) He might tell you that you don't need to fix it immediately, in which case it isn't a safety hazard!

2. Good Faith i. A public officer told me this was legal.

3. 48 Hour Rule i. Police Must File all Criminal Tickets within 48 Hours of the Arrest. ii. Police must file all civil infractions within 72 hours.

4. Ticket Contains Extra Fees i. Police must limit ticket amount to the schedule listed in the court rules. They

cannot add extra fees to the ticket. 5. Separation of Church & State

i. I am the temple of the Most High (1 Corinthians 3:16, 1 Corinthians 6:19, etc.), and therefore, according to your law, I must remain separate from you. For the state to require that the church be licensed to travel would violate your law. (Note: Separation of Church & State is not Biblical, nor is it Constitutional, so make sure you always classify your argument as an objection to contradictions within their law, not yours.)

6. Pretextual Stops i. The cause ceasing, the affect must cease (Maxim of law) (State vs. Ladson may

be applicable) 7. Alleged Violation is Commercial

Abatements are a very viable method of defense, and although they are technically dilatory pleadings, if correctly used they can stop most court proceedings and render the cases moot. If however, for whatever reason, the abatement does not succeed, you will have to continue to the next step and challenge jurisdiction. It should be noted that arguments which fail at one level, may, and should, be brought forth to the second level. Therefore, if you fail to abate their documents you may, when you challenger jurisdiction, again use the abatement arguments (i.e. misnomer, invalid signature, etc). This applies not only to abatements and challenges to jurisdiction, but to most of the arguments in general. If they fail at one level, argue them again at another level. The arguments should remain the same, only the application should change.

It should also be noted that arguments under any category can and may be jurisdictional issues. For example, even though the Essential Element Rule is listed under "To the count or declaration", it is still a jurisdictional issue.

After you have properly served abatement process, wait and let them make the next move. They will probably ignore the abatement and demand you appear. In this case, abate each and every letter they send you, don't ignore them, refuse them for cause. They will soon realize they have defaulted, at this point they may just give up and leave you alone, or they may decide to play it rough and take you by force. In the mean time, pray for God's will to be done (it will be!), hope for the best, and prepare for the worst. We know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose (Rom 8:28).


Illegal as it may be, the judge may ignore your plea in abatement; in that case, they will demand you appear. Your appearance is not lawfully required at this point, but failing to appear may cause more trouble than it is worth. If and when you do appear, be careful, your appearance is a crucial part of your procedure. There is so much debate over the topic of appearances that it really deserves its own book, but we will go over the basics here. Should you appear as the defendant? Refuse to appear? Deny the existence of the defendant? Represent the defendant as trustee? Refuse to accept a role as trustee? What?!?

1. You do not want to appear as the defendant (trust), because by doing so you accept responsibility for the trust. Remember, statutorily, the courts have plenary power over trusts, they can do whatever they want with them. So this option is ruled out.

2. Refusing to appear might be legal and all, but doing that might get a warrant issued for the arrest of the fiction, and you know who that warrant will be enforced upon, you. Choose this method if you wish, but I don't advise it.

3. Denying the existence of the defendant won't get you anywhere either. It is true that the defendant doesn't exist physically, but they have created a fictional trust by their legal process, so it does exist legally.

4. Representing the defendant as trustee is a viable method, but a trustee can still be held responsible for a trust (even though trusts cannot commit crimes), so you might run into some problems there.

5. Refusing to accept a role as trustee is perhaps the best alternative. Here you argue that the defendant does exist, but that he has no relationship with you, the flesh & blood man. This allows you to appear and argue that you are not the defendant. And, if you are overruled, you can still defend the defendant as trustee. Then, if the trust is convicted, you can argue that you are not responsible. Even if the rule against you in all of these points, the trust can only be sentenced to fines, no prison time!

However when you appear, it is important that you do not personally accept responsibility for the defendant; do not argue that your name is spelled wrong, argue that it is not your name. When you do appear, appear specially, not generally. Special appearances, if used correctly, do have some effect.

Arraignment

When you appear at arraignment, the first thing that the judge will do is read of a list of names and ask those present to respond. Do not, I repeat, DO NOT respond "Here" to this roll call. Instead, answer "The defendant in this case, being a trust and therefore a legal fiction, is not present. However, I have appeared under protest by special appearance in the capacity an involuntary trustee to re‐present the defendant's interest." In response to this you will usually be asked, "Who are you?" to which you should reply, "My identity is irrelevant as I myself am not subject to this jurisdiction. Nevertheless, my


paperwork does contain, among other things, my Christian appellation, and during the course of this trial I will respond to that appellation insomuch as I see fit, provided that this court understands the distinction between myself and the defendant. I hereby break any presumptions that I am the defendant. Said presumptions include but are not limited to those founded in the doctrine of Idem Sonans."

The first question you will be asked at arraignment is "Do you understand the charge(s)?". Never admit to understanding the charge(s). If questioned, Explain that in order to understand the charges you must also understand how to defend yourself (how do you defend yourself against a crime when there is no injured party?). You may also explain that the word under‐stand means exactly that, to stand under. You do not, nor will you ever, stand under his/her corrupt jurisdiction.

At this point you will be asked "How do you plead?". Aside from your appearance, the most important aspect of your defense is your pleading. It must be stressed that one should NOT plead Not Guilty. A Not Guilty plea is a general denial, not a specific denial. When asked "How do you plead?" simply hand them your written pleading, don't plead verbally. The judge may take the pleading and enter a general "Not Guilty" plea, but if he does it really doesn't matter, the important thing is that he has already been served. Enter an objection on the record to the not guilty plea and take the issue up at trial.

After being arraigned, the judge will set a trial date. If the court asks you to sign a promise to appear, remind them of your capacity and standing then question them further as to the consequences, should you refuse to sign. If there are no consequences it is nothing more than an offer, politely refuse to sign. Otherwise, sign it, but as mentioned above, write TDC/ARR on it. Make sure it partially covers your signature so they can’t remove it.

Trial

When you file documents in court, you should always include, along with your briefs, a copy of your termination document. This document will remove any assumptions they might have as to your legal standing.

Always proceed in forma paupers. The court systems exist to generate revenue, so if you don't look like a potential resource they will leave you alone. You can always proceed in forma paupers, even if you have Federal Reserve Notes, as they are not lawful money. We have already prepared a Motion to Proceed in Forma Paupers for your convenience; please see Chapter 10 for more information.

The flag flown does not establish jurisdiction, but it indicates the jurisdiction which is exercised and the venue in which is used. To avoid being subjected to military jurisdiction you should carry a true American flag, or your state's flag, every time you enter the bar in a court flying an admiralty flag. The flag should be carried below your head, and it should be made in accordance with the lawful measurements and specifications.


In today’s courts, there are many customs, rituals, traditions, practices and procedures that we usually follow like a bunch of dumb sheep. One particular custom, which is often followed with little thought, is the command "All Rise" which is given any time the judge comes into, or leaves, the room. This practice originally started due to the fact that the judge carried an open Bible as he walked in, men stood in reverence to the word of God. Today’s courts have thrown out the Bible, so they expect you to stand in reverence of them. They will tell you it is mandatory, they might even charge you with contempt if you refuse. However, it is completely voluntary. If they give you any trouble, just cite United States v. Snider, 502 F.2d 645.

At this point, the judge will probably ask to see your paperwork, provide him with the documents and wait for him to read them. When finished, he will probably ask if all parties are ready to proceed with trial. At this point, you should speak up and say "No. There are several administrative issues, which must be addressed prior to the commencement of trial. I, acting in the capacity declared by my NOA, abated this process and all documents pertaining to it for fatal errors. The plaintiff failed to correct said errors or enter a timely rebuttal and has therefore defaulted. This case cannot proceed." At this point, you should wait for his response, after which you should present your abatement documents, proof of service, and a motion to dismiss. If this is denied, enter an objection on the record and move to the next step, jurisdictional challenges.

Jurisdictional challenges come next; in personam and subject matter challenges should be challenged in separate paperwork.

If at any time during the trial the judge threatens to throw you in jail, inquire further and demand that he clarify exactly whom he is talking about. Remember, you are not the defendant (fiction). If the judge maintains that he is talking about you, the sovereign representing the trust, enter a motion to intervene, because it looks like your rights may be affected by this trial.

When a judge denies a motion, the law requires that he issue a Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law. Failure to do so results in a presumption to the defendant's favor. Note, this applies to judicial determinations only; juries are not obligated to issues Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law.

Remember, if it comes down to the end and all your remedies have been denied, you may have to argue the merits of the case. If this happens, you may consider getting some friends to enter affidavits, denying that the police report is accurate. It must be stressed here that we are not in any way advocating lying, as Christians, we must realize that the end does not justify the means. Instead, we are suggesting that the affidavits state truthful facts. For example, you may truthfully assert that you were not at the location stated on the ticket. This is truthful and lawful because legally the location stated on the ticket refers to a section of Washington DC (see briefs on zip codes, state abbreviations, and federal territories). Some may see this as being overly technical, they believe that we are trying to avoid the issue and muddy the water. However, such is not the case, if there was no legal significance to the change, we would have no problem with it. Nevertheless, the evidence is too clear; a meticulous examination of their code reveals a system literally built on deception and redefined terms. By denying that their documents are factual, we state only the truth.


The only remaining question is whether or not we must explain our denials to them. Would it be telling only a half‐truth if we stated the facts without explaining it? Well, I believe that we would have an obligation to explain ourselves, had we been responsible for redefining the terms. However, in view of the fact that it is them, not us, who redefined the terms. And in view of the fact that their law specifically lays it out for all who read it to observe. And in view of the fact that ignorance of the law is no excuse (especially to officers of the law, the very people who write and enforce it). I believe these fully true statements may be stated without explanation, as it is their responsibility to understand the laws they write. There are certainly times when this is allowed (1 Samuel 16:2), and I believe that this is certainly one of those times. If they do not understand the laws they write and enforce, too bad, I certainly will not help the ungodly at the risk of incurring God’s wrath (2 Chronicles 19:2). These people have no fear of God and are therefore fools (Psalms 14:1, Psalms 53:1, Proverbs 28:26). A fool cannot understand anything (Proverbs 17:10, Proverbs 17:24, Proverbs 24:7, etc.), as a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly (Proverbs 26:11), we are not to speak in the ears of a fool, for he will despise the wisdom of our words (Proverbs 23:9).

The court system now hears almost all cases in equity. However, this is because the overwhelming majority of litigants accept a role as trust. If there is no trust involved, then there is no ground or basis to hear the case in equity. Equity is voluntary, unless you are operating in trust law. The reason courts now operate in equity is because, as beneficiary, the corporate government has no legal title, only equitable title. If they had legal title, they would proceed in law, not equity.

When you challenge the trust relationship in court, get the plaintiff (alleged beneficiary) on the stand and question him as the prior relationships between you and the plaintiff. Ask him if there exists a trust and who the parties in the trust are. In all probability, he will have no clue what you are talking about, but even if he did understand how the legal game works, the chances are he would just play stupid to avoid letting the cat out of the bag. If both you and the plaintiff deny a trust relationship then there exists no bifurcated title, and therefore no equitable jurisdiction. Without equity jurisdiction, they have no case. Unless the title is bifurcated by a trust, you own it in allodium.

Make it clear to the judge that the Scripture, which is your Law, is not present in the court, and therefore you have nothing to say, until your Law is being used in that court. By pointing out that the Scripture is your Law, you are importing your Law into the proceedings. If you do not do this, you will be considered by the court to be "lawless."

Affidavits are an easy way for anyone to present evidence. Affidavits cannot and should not make legal arguments. They should stick to facts and avoid law as much as possible. When composing affidavits, make either short, positive statements of fact or negative averments. Place the burden of proof on your opponent. Do not cite authorities or incorporate materials by reference unless you prepared the referenced material and it is signed and dated. Do not make a statement like, "I am not a taxpayer"—that’s an opinion. Instead state, "I am not in receipt of any document which verifies that I am a taxpayer owing a tax to the United States Treasury"—that is a fact!


Negative averments are a powerful tool when used correctly. Properly stated negative averments are nothing more than a denial, or traverse. When you challenge, by negative averments, a jurisdictional premise, the court cannot proceed until the premise is conclusively proven.

Always remember that terms and definitions mean everything. It is not uncommon to see whole cases that are won or lost because of a single verbicide. Remember, they are masters at deception; they know that by redefining common words they can obtain a consensus based on fraud. So be wary.

Never wave any rights, demand them all, especially the right to counsel. When you demand your right to counsel (a lawyer) they will usually try to give you representation (an attorney), don't fall for it. Accepting representation places you as a ward of the court, and, as a ward of the court you are deemed to be incompetent. Demand counsel, even if you don't think you will need it. If they refuse to comply with your demand for counsel, you cannot be jailed.

Objections are one of the best tools you will have at trial, so learn how to make them stick! Take exception to everything you don't like, and do your best to substantiate your objection with a legitimate reason (i.e. res judicata, hearsay, irrelevancy, etc.). Keep objecting, even if your objections are being overruled. The important thing is to get your objection on the record so you can bring it up another time. There may be times when an objectionable issue is raised that demands resolution. In this case you may find it necessary to take the objection to the next level. Proper objections go through five steps:

1. "I Object!" ‐ This is a basic objection. The Judge will either grants the objection or Deny and Overrule it.

2. "I take Exception!" ‐ This raises the objection to a higher level. It has made the record, but the judge is still neutral. The judge responds: "Your exception is noted."

3. "I move the question be certified." ‐ This is requesting the judge to ask a higher court to back him up in the objection. The objector feels the judge is prejudice or disqualified so he must consult a higher court. If the judge agrees to certify, the litigant responds, "I move the court for recess pending the written certification of the question." If the judge responds: "The motion denied" (denial of certification of the question) then proceed to step 4.

4. "I move the court for leave to file an interlocutory appeal." ‐ A petition is put before the court of appeals to consider the question. One must request permission to approach the court of appeals. You can then move for recess until a decision comes from the court of appeals and suggest 60‐90 days. Bring a motion in the court of appeals for a stay of proceedings until a decision is made. If you are denied your motion to file the interlocutory appeal you must respond with:

5. "I serve notice upon the court of my intent to petition the Court of Appeals for leave to file an interlocutory appeal." ‐ At this point you should move for recess.

If you follow these steps, you have properly objected in every way possible. If your motion to recess is denied, respond with: "I reserve my rights and further participation from now on is under fear, threat,


and duress." If you are ever befuddled when asked for the basis of objection, ask the court recorder to read back the record, assuming it is a court of record.

Be firm when you make statements. Don't express opinions or feelings, state facts. Don't make motions, make demands. Being wimpy gives them courage, and it also gives the court the benefit of discussion on the matter. Be confident and forceful when asserting your rights, acting timid will also make you look bad in front of a jury.

If the judge keeps interrupting you, wait until the next time he asks you a question. When he asks you a question, reply with, "For the record." Then you may proceed to say what the Holy Spirit moves you to say without interruption, for as long as you want. The judge cannot hinder a record being made.

If you do not want to swear simply state, "Due to the tenants of my faith, as set forth in the fifth chapter of Matthew, I am prohibited from forswearing oaths. Therefore, in lieu of an oath, I hereby affirm that I shall tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth." If, after swearing or affirming to tell "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth", the judge tells you that for some reason (irrelevancy, narration, etc.) you cannot make certain statements you can simply respond, "Judge, I have sworn/agreed to tell the whole truth. If you will not allow the whole truth in this court I shall get up and leave."

Nearly always, you will want to have a trial by jury. When doing so, it is absolutely essential that the jury be properly informed of their rights. An informed jury will make an informed decision; but a corrupt judge will railroad an uninformed jury. Jurors have the right not only to decide facts, but they may decide law as well. The judge will likely tell the jury just the opposite, and for this reason, we have included, with this book, a memorandum of law, which comprehensively documents the rights of jurors. For more information about this brief, see the end of this book.

If the judge demands that you sign his order simply respond, "If you are a judge, sign it yourself. I am not the defendant and I have no obligation to sign for the defendant." If you capitulate at this point and sign for the defendant you are validating the judge's de facto order in the capacity of a legal fiction, this is equivalent to a full surrender. If you are absolutely forced to sign, sign it and write "As Involuntary Trustee Only. Without recourse to myself. T.D.C." A signature like the one described above will do them no good legally, but if the order you signed demands jail time, they may jail you instead of the defendant, so sign it only as a last recourse if they threaten to physically jail you for refusal.

Finally, if you are convicted, immediately condemn the tongue(s) of the judge or jury (Isaiah 54:17 ‐ be BOLD about it!) and notice the court that you are going to appeal their decision. In courts not of record, do not appeal, but rather demand a trial de novo (new trial).


Post‐Judgment Strategies Almost any arguments in the "Court" chapter that was applicable but was not raised at or before your trail can be raised in a Motion for Relief from Judgment, a Motion to Void Judgment, or Motion to Vacate Judgment. Collateral attacks are probably the most effective post‐judgment strategy, so use them as much as possible.

I would recommend setting a new trial date for each hearing, since there is no limit to the number of hearings you can have. Wear them out! Drag each hearing out ALAP (As Long As Possible!) and cost them money. Remember, the love of money is the root of their evil tyranny, if your case is not making them money they WILL drop it! This is a great opportunity, raise as many issues as you possibly can, use any arguments you can think of! Even the most unjust judge can be worn out (Luke 18:1‐5)!

If you are unable to have the judgment vacated by collateral attack, you should then try for a Trail De Novo. In courts not of record a Trail De Novo is a matter of right, otherwise, it is discretionary. If you've made any mistakes at your last trial, this will give you an opportunity to try it again. You will be able to argue the entire case, including pretrial arguments like In Personam Jurisdiction and Suppression of Evidence.

If the court denies your right to a Trial De Novo, or if they convict you again, enter an appeal. When you appeal a decision, you must have the record transferred to the next court. If you fail to properly designate the record, it will be lost and you will not be able to raise your defense issues on appeal.

Never give up just because the court finds you guilty, there is always hope, even if they deny you your right to appeal or trial de novo.

If you are in jail, petition the court for a writ of habeas corpus. The "Great Writ of Liberty" is rarely honored in today's courts, but it is always worth a try. There are basically seven (7) common writs of habeas corpus. However, the name usually refers to a specific writ known in full as habeas corpus ad subjiciendum, a prerogative writ ordering that a prisoner be brought to the court so it can be determined whether or not the prisoner is being imprisoned lawfully. Other writs of habeas corpus include:

1. Habeas corpus ad deliberandum et recipiendum ("[That] you may have/hold the body to deliberate and retire")

2. Habeas corpus ad faciendum et recipiendum, also known as habeas corpus cum causa ("[That] you may have/hold the body when there is a case at law")

3. Habeas corpus ad prosequendum ("[That] you may have/hold the body to prosecute") 4. Habeas corpus ad respondendum ("[That] you may have/hold the body to answer") 5. Habeas corpus ad satisfaciendum ("[That] you may have/hold the body until it is sufficient [to let

him/her go]") 6. Habeas corpus ad testificandum ("[That] you may have/hold the body to bear witness")


Study the constitutional provisions for habeas corpus and practice until you can write a basic petition for habeas corpus from memory, you never know when you might need to write one from a jail cell, be prepared.

If you were fined, turn in an affidavit informing the court that you are insolvent and unable to lawfully pay, due to the fact that lawful currency (gold and silver coin) has been removed from circulation. Make sure you leave no doubt in their minds whose fault this is; blame it on presidential treason, congressional mischief, and state negligence. For more information on this issue see our book on money (coming soon, contact me if interested!).

For your convenience, we have already prepared a notice of appeal, a demand for trial de novo, a petition for habeas corpus ad subjiciendum, and an affidavit of insolvency. These documents are on the CD that accompanies this book. More information is available at the end of this book.

After a conviction, you may consider filing suit against the judge. When a judicial officer acts entirely without jurisdiction or without compliance with jurisdiction requisites he may be held civilly liable for abuse of process even though his act involved a decision made in good faith, that he had jurisdiction.


Staying Free Staying free is perhaps as hard as getting free, but immensely rewarding. In this chapter, I will briefly outline some pitfalls to avoid.

You must remember that there is a balance between living free, and staying free. If you live "too free" (an impossibility, but you know what I mean), you won't stay free for long in our society. If you put all you effort into staying free (out of jail and trouble), you will find that you can't live a very free life. You are the only one who can decide where you want to take a stand and draw your line; I can't do that for you. However, I can give you a few suggestions that will help.

Avoid signing contracts with the corporate government. If you want to jump through their hoops for convenience sake make sure you sign "Restricted/ARR" along with your signature, add "TDC" (Threat, Duress and Cohesion) if they are forcing to you sign the paper, and add "Involuntary Trustee Only" if the fictional trust is named on the document.

When you get a traffic ticket, a letter, or other paperwork from the corporate government, don't ignore it, abate it and send it back. You always want to go the extra mile to make sure you are on the safe side.

When you receive a letter, addressed to the fiction, simply right "No such person at this location" and give it back to the Post Office, don't open it. If it is addressed to a commercial address (with zip code and two‐letter state abbreviations) you should also write "No such address at this location".

You might want to switch over to general delivery, which is the only common‐law mail system. The free‐delivery thing is a benefit, and it comes with strings attached.

Write "Exchanged under protest for non‐negotiable FRN's of debt" on your checks before cashing them.

Any time you contract with corporate government, do it "at arm’s length". In other words, don't let them create a trust, and don't accept a role as trustee. We have prepared an affidavit which you may sign and annex to documents you sign, it will break their power of presumption.

Praecipe the clerk of the court to issue you an immediate notice should anyone file any paperwork pertaining to you or the trust.

Before you fill out a government forms, you should find out which fields are required by law. Then write out your own form with the mandatory information only.

Contracts, sale agreements, and other negotiations should be done with gold and silver coin, pre A.D. 1933.

Post your property with No Trespass Signs (not No Trespassing signs) to prevent government agents from trespassing upon your land.


Prepared Briefs The information provided in this book is essential to winning your court battles. Our goal is your victory, so I won’t send you off half cocked. This book comes with over ____ pages of generic legal documents that have already been prepared for your use.

These briefs are on the Compact Disk (CD) that accompanied this book; or, if you are using the digital version of book, they are included in the same zipped file that this e‐book came in. Most documents are in Microsoft Word or WordPerfect format.

These briefs cover some of the more effective arguments and give you examples you can use when writing your own briefs. Each brief has been proofread, and all user‐specific information (i.e. Names, Case Number, Court Venue, etc.) has been highlighted yellow to assist you in locating them.

Each brief has been written as a memorandum of law (with a few exceptions). This allows you to use the memorandum in any way you like; it can be annexed to a Motion to Dismiss, a Motion to Strike, a Notice of Abatement, a Plea in Bar, a Demurrer, whatever. When using these memorandums, you will have to prepare the motion or plea to which you will attach the brief. Usually, you should prepare a proposed order for the judge to sign. We have already prepared a motion that moves for dismissal based upon each and every memorandum. It will give you a good platform to work from, just remove any arguments that are inapplicable to your immediate case, and add any additional arguments specific to your situation.

We recommend that you thoroughly study each brief before you file it. The briefs are clear and self‐explanatory, but unless you are able to articulate the arguments presented in your brief, your chances of winning are very slim. The court will usually require that at least 20% of your arguments are verbal.

When filing these briefs, you may get a court clerk who refuses to file a document. In this case, you will have to file a Writ of Praecipe (also included on the CD) directing the clerk to perform her duty and file the document; remember, that is her job. The court clerk is not a judge and has no right to make legal decisions about the legal documents you are filing.

You may find that when you present these arguments in superior court your case is quickly dismissed, maybe from your argument, for some other unseen technical error, or sometimes, the government itself will move for dismissal, I have seen it happen. This is usually because the court does not want your arguments to be heard on the appellate level, they don't want it to set case‐law precedent.

If you have a significant case which is crucial to win and you want to make sure you win, we recommend printing each and every brief which could possibly be applicable to your case. Spend a few days reading them so you understand them, and then file them. In most cases, if you file a two‐foot thick stack of paperwork with hundreds of memorandums, the court will drop your case like a hot potato; it just isn't worth it for them. Remember, they have to pay for their attorneys and for your lawyer!


These briefs will be coming later, I am still working on the book itself. If you need the briefs now, contact me via email of phone and I will email you the briefs you need if they are completed.

We would greatly appreciate any legal briefs you might be able to contribute to this project. Be sure to contact us if you have something you think might be useful!



Post Script I’m not trying to be a pessimist, but I am afraid this book was written far too optimistically. When I originally penned this short piece, I wrote it hoping against hope that exposing the unconstitutionalities of the American court system would force judges to follow the law. Unfortunately, I was wrong. The judicial system grows worse every year.

Up until recently, the constitutional arguments we have presented were quite successful. In the last few years, this has changed drastically. An acquaintance of mine was recently jailed on the charge of “paper terrorism” for quoting scripture passages in his defense brief. Habeas corpus is officially suspended. Emergency and War powers are continually being expanded. The list of grievances grows daily.

It has been said that there are four boxes that guarantee liberty and freedom. The Vocal Box, Voting Box, The Jury Box, and the Ammo Box; to be used in that order. America now has “Free Speech Zones”, outside which any politically incorrect positions may cause your arrest. America now has electronic voting machines, which have been proven fraudulent on many occasions. America now has the Military Commissions Act, which allows US Citizens to be imprisoned indefinitely without any trial, let alone a Trial by Jury. There is only one box left, folks, and even that has been infringed upon, use it carefully.

Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots? Then may tyrants dispose themselves to reform. (Jer 13:23) Until then, it rests with us to reclaim the freedoms bought by the blood of our forefathers. As stated above, the value and price of freedom is "Every drop of sweat, every ounce of pain, every pint of blood...paid in advance."

know thy rights

Documents