The below videos are two parts in the extradition hearing held against Anthony Williams in Hawaii. Georgia had requested that he be extradited.

Mr. Williams seems to have a pretty good grasp of the common law, but he made numerous mistakes during the hearing. It should be noted that the judge and prosecutor have both committed acts of treason against these united states. Mr. Williams repeatedly challenged jurisdiction in the court, but the judge did not respond to his challenges and, according to volumes of case law, was supposed to stop all proceedings until such time as the judge proved that his equity court has jurisdiction over one of the people. Of course, it does not.

Mr. Williams also asked the judge if he was under his oath during the hearing and the judge repeatedly evaded the question. He said at one point that he did take an oath when he became a judge, but he refused to answer whether or not he was under his oath that day. There is good reason for that. The judge was presiding over an equity court, not a common law court. If he was under his oath that day, he would not have been able to permit the proceedings for two reasons; the US Constitution protects the people right to a common law court and the judge does not get to make any decisions in a common law court, because he is simply a magistrate not a tribunal. I will discuss the mistakes that Mr. Williams made below. If any of you reading this know Mr. Williams, have him contact this site and we will do what we can to help Mr. Williams.

There are several mistakes that Mr. Williams made during this hearing. Each are listed below.

1. Mr. Williams did not file a counterclaim to challenge the courts jurisdiction. Mr. Williams has to be the plaintiff for a successful jurisdictional challenge. The challenge has to include the fact that he is one of the people and the counter claim is filed in a court of record. The judge is a magistrate in a court of record and is not pernitted to make any decisions or orders.
2. Mr. Williams repeatedly referred to himself as a citizen. He almost had it right, but so long as he refers to himself as a citizen, he is subject to the equity court, because the government owns all citizens. It does not own people.
3. If Mr. Williams was demanding a common law court or court of record, he should not have participated in the proceedings. A common law court is not just a court by name, it proceeds as a court of record. Mr. Williams should have insisted that the judge prove he has jurisdiction before he proceeded.
4. One blatant clue the court was not proceeding according to common law was the testimony from the government employees. Government employees cannot testify in a court of record.
5. The Hawaii code was being used in the court. A court of record only uses codes or statutes if the plaintiff decrees some specific code as the law. Common law has neither statutes or codes therefore the court could not have been a court of record.

Mr. Williams can still file suit against the participants in that hearing and any other proceedings. It must be done correctly per the common law procedures. The plaintiff in the case is the tribunal. The judge is only a magistrate. There is no statute of limitations in common law, since there are no statutes, Mr. Williams can still have his day in court.

He came close when he was quoting the Hawaii code which specified a court of record and called the judge a magistrate. In a court of record the plaintiff is the tribunal and the magistrate is separate from the tribunal. Once again, the judge is not permitted to make any decisions or orders. Judges will refuse to answer questions about being on their oath during the proceedings, because they know that if it is made a matter of record that they are on their oath, they can in fact be tried for treason. Remember, judges have seminars to learn how to deceive we the people. Ignorance and freedom cannot co-exist.

Defend Freedom™