[andy jackson]

Don't you just love, the government can accuse you [well actually not you but YOU the corporate fiction JOHN DOE] of thought crimes. Are they testifying that JOHN DOE knew the UCC-1 was false and the Bond, etc, was false and as usual is there ever any factual evidence to support this 'opinion' of theirs?

It's a crime if you do it, but if they do it it's the law.

[andy jackson]

As famguardian likes to point out over and over “are you a franchisee” of the UNITED STATES?

First, there are many points I believe where Pete H. gave it over to the feds.

1. He got a lawyer

An attorney automatically voids any jurisdictional challenges look up 'propria persona' in blacks law 4th

2. If you don't make the challenges and break the presumptions you can't bring them up later.

What presumptions? Well… Can the opposition show factual evidence to answer the following:

1. Are you a statutory rather than constitutional citizen?,

2. Are you a statutory “Person”?,

3. Is there any basis under the U.S. Constituion to tax the fruit of your labor?,

4. Is there a known duty and evidence of a contract making me liable for IRS taxation?,

5. Am I a 'resident'?,

6. DO I live in the Federal Zone?, [if you have a zip code and live in AZ or TX or NY you live in the federal Zone,

7. Is the court documents committing a misnomer charging PETER HENDRICKSON living at BLAB BLAH, NY, 20212-6854?

8. Was there the required evidence of 'standing' [proof of a personal loss or injury] on the part of the IRS?

9. Was it a 'court of record' [where only common law applies]?

10. Did you demand a common law court?

I believe the game is over before it started when you have corrupt judges with a conflict of interest [title 5, 4502, they can give a $25,000 cash award to any judge [bribe] for convicting IRS protesters.

You have to put all your points and authorities, defects in their case into the record and demand before hand that the judge show proof of claim with points and authorities for any determinations he makes and then second in a court of record he can't make any legal determinations only the jury can.

There are a lot of things I would have done differently.

The biggest deception is that the judge fails to show why and under what authority he is acting and no one challenges that. I would have gotten a certified copy of his 'oath' and written across it my acceptance – there now the judge is in contract with me to honor the constitution, otherwise he is not. You are a slave, and usually only argue meaningless points from his perspective and without telling you why, he rolls over you.