If you do have to deal with them
there are three pertinent questions
you always wish to address to the Court and the Prosecutor:
Does this Court have jurisdiction over the living man?
(No, they do not.)
What probable cause does the Prosecutor or Police Officer have for presuming that....
(for example --
the Defendant was driving for hire and not simply traveling for private purposes?
Use whatever applies to your case.)
In the vast majority of cases the Prosecutor has no probable cause to presume
anything about the capacity in which you were acting.
Finally, put them in a Double Bind.
If you are dealing with a Law Enforcement Officer giving testimony against you,
ask him if he is an attorney?
If not, how is he competent to interpret the statutory law or Federal Code
and make a determination that any crime occurred?
(He's not a competent Witness for their purposes and they know that,
but they will bluff if you don’t call them on it).
The other alternative will be a standard case where you have an attorney acting
as Prosecutor and they will be making accusations against you without any
first-hand knowledge of anything at all, so you ask --
Mr. Prosecuting Attorney, do you have any first-hand knowledge
of the circumstance and happenings that you are referring to in this complaint?
(No, of course not, he is just chuffing wind.)
"Will it please the Court to hear my testimony
under affirmation and penalty of perjury,
as I am (in most cases) the only Witness to these events
having first-hand knowledge of them?"
Either they have no competent Witness or ninety-percent of the time they have
no Witness at all and whatever account you give of your actions and intentions
stands.