Requirement for Consent

ratification. Like other voidable contracts, it is valid until it is avoided by the person entitled to avoid it. 10 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. 11 ”

1

2

3

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

4

All governments are established EXCLUSIVELY for the protection of PRIVATE rights. The first step in protecting private 5 rights, in turn, is to prevent them from being converted into public rights and public property without the consent of the 6 owner. Therefore, anyone in government who calls anything voluntary is committing FRAUD if they refuse to protect your 7 right to NOT volunteer by: 8 1. Readily recognizing that those who do NOT consent exist. For instance, recognizing and protecting the fact that: 9 1.1. Not everyone is a “driver” under the vehicle code, and it is OK to travel WITHOUT a “license” or permission 10 from the government if you are not using the roadways to conduct business activity. 11 1.2. “nontaxpayers” or “persons other than statutory taxpayers” exist. 12 1.3. You are encouraged and allowed to get married WITHOUT a state license and write your own marriage contract. 13 The family code is a franchise and a contract. Since you have a right NOT to contract, then you have a right to 14 write your own marriage contract that excludes ANY participation by the government or any right by the 15 government to write the terms of the marriage contract. 16 2. Prosecuting those who engage in any of the following activities that injure non-consenting parties: 17 2.1. Institute duress against people who are compelled to misrepresent their status on a government form as a 18 precondition of doing business. Banks and employers do this all the time and it is CRIMINAL. 19 2.2. PRESUME that you are a consenting party and franchisee, such as a “taxpayer”, “driver”, “spouse”, etc. We call 20 this “theft by presumption”, because such a presumption associates you with the obligations of a status you do not 21 have because you didn’t consent to have it. 22 3. Providing forms and checkboxes on existing forms that recognize those who don’t consent or volunteer, such as a 23 “nontaxpayer” or “non -resident non-person ” block on tax withholding forms. 24 4. Providing a block on their forms that says “Not subject but not statutorily ‘exempt’”. An “exempt” person is, after all, 25 someone who is otherwise subject but is given a special exclusion for a given situation. One can be “not subject” 26 without being statutorily “exempt”. 27 5. Providing forms and remedies for those who are either nonresidents or those who have been subjected to duress to 28 misrepresent their status as being a franchisee such as a “taxpayer”. 29 6. Providing a REAL, common law, non-franchise court, where those who are not party to the franchise can go to get a 30 remedy that is just as convenient and inexpensive as that provided to franchisees. Example: U.S. Tax Court Rule 31 13(a) says that only franchisees called statutory “taxpayers” can petition the court, and yet there is not equally 32 convenient remedy for NONTAXPAYERS and judges in district court harass, threaten and penalize those who are 33 “nontaxpayer”. 34 7. Dismissing all cases filed in franchise courts such as U.S. Tax Court by “nontaxpayers” and stopping all collection 35 activity against those who are not statutory franchisees called “taxpayers” . Otherwise, the practical effect is that the 36 party petitioning the court is electing him or herself into a public office and engaging in the criminal activity of 37 impersonating a public officer franchisee called a “taxpayer” in violation of 18 U.S.C. §912. 38

It is a maxim of law that gross negligence is equivalent to FRAUD. If they CALL something “voluntary” and yet refuse to 39 ENFORCE all the above, it is gross negligence and therefore fraud under the common law: 40

Lata culpa dolo aequiparatur. Gross negligence is equal to fraud. [Bouvier’s Maxims of Law, 1856;

41

42

43

SOURCE: http://famguardian.org/Publications/BouvierMaximsOfLaw/BouviersMaxims.htm]

44

A failure to implement all of the above by those who call themselves “government” is also a violation of the requirement 45 for “equal protection of the law” that is the foundation of the United States Constitution. Any organization that calls itself a 46 “government” and that does NOT provide ALL the remedies indicated above is a de facto government that is engaging in 47

10 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) 11 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

92 of 396

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

EXHIBIT:________