Requirement for Consent

execute the agreement as the state of mind induced. 70 Duress, like fraud, rarely becomes material, except where a contract or conveyance has been made which the maker wishes to avoid. As a general rule, duress renders the contract or conveyance voidable, not void, at the option of the person coerced, 71 and it is susceptible of ratification. Like other voidable contracts, it is valid until it is avoided by the person entitled to avoid it. 72 However, duress in the form of physical compulsion, in which a party is caused to appear to assent when he has no intention of doing so, is generally deemed to render the resulting purported contract void. 73 ”

1

2

3

4

5

6

[American Jurisprudence 2d, Duress, §21 (1999)]

7

In order to avoid the mandates of government bureaucrats, we therefore must: 8

1. Know what duress is from a legal perspective.

9

2. Be able to immediately recognize, identify, and prove the existence of duress. 10 3. Continually produce evidence of duress and absence of consent in our government administrative record. 11 4. Use the evidence generated in our administrative record as a defense in any legal or administrative proceeding against 12 any government that tries to enforce its franchises against us. 13

This section will therefore serve as a way to help you understand how to both identify the duress and generate evidence of 14 it. 15

If you would like an affidavit you can enter into your administrative record demonstrating unlawful duress and which is 16 useful in establishing a reliance defense in the context of taxation, please see: 17

Affidavit of Duress: Illegal Tax Enforcement by De Facto Officers , Form #02.005 http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm

10.8.1

Deceptive language and words of art

18

IRS makes false presumptions about the meaning of several important words in its publications and forms and website 19 which it is unwilling to share with you and which prejudice your rights and sovereignty in most cases. In such a case, we 20 must remind ourselves what the U.S. Supreme Court said about the abuse of “presumption” to exceed the authority of the 21 Constitution: 22

"The power to create [false] presumptions is not a means of escape from constitutional restrictions,"

23

[New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964)]

24

The purpose of these “words of art” is to deceive you into believing their false presumptions and thereby commit 25 constructive fraud. The abused words include, but are not limited to: 26

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

“United States”

27

“State” “state”

28

29

“foreign”

30

“nonresident alien”

31

“U.S. citizen” “employee”

32

33

“income”

34

“gross income”

35

10. “trade or business”

36

70 Brown v. Pierce, 74 U.S. 205, 7 Wall 205, 19 L.Ed. 134

71 Barnette v. Wells Fargo Nevada Nat’l Bank, 270 U.S. 438, 70 L.Ed. 669, 46 S.Ct. 326 (holding that acts induced by duress which operate solely on the mind, and fall short of actual physical compulsion, are not void at law, but are voidable only, at the election of him whose acts were induced by it); Faske v. Gershman, 30 Misc.2d. 442, 215 N.Y.S.2d. 144; Glenney v. Crane (Tex Civ App Houston (1st Dist)), 352 S.W.2d. 773, writ ref n r e (May 16, 1962); Carroll v. Fetty, 121 W.Va. 215, 2 S.E.2d. 521, cert den 308 U.S. 571, 84 L.Ed. 479, 60 S.Ct. 85. 72 Faske v. Gershman, 30 Misc.2d. 442, 215 N.Y.S.2d. 144; Heider v. Unicume, 142 Or. 416, 20 P.2d. 384; Glenney v. Crane (Tex Civ App Houston (1st Dist)), 352 S.W.2d. 773, writ ref n r e (May 16, 1962) 73 Restatement 2d, Contracts §174, stating that if conduct that appears to be a manifestation of assent by a party who does not intend to engage in that conduct is physically compelled by duress, the conduct is not effective as a manifestation of assent.

Requirement for Consent

354 of 396

Copyright Sovereignty Education and Defense Ministry, http://sedm.org Form 05.003, Rev. 7-23-2013

EXHIBIT:________