"without...the tax code, we would have anarchy and we would have no country,"

RevokeTheTrust · #1 07-07-2006, 03:07 PM

I found this article, in a reference to TINYURL by brother Bo for Gritz. A retired Navy Doctor/surgeon, laughably accused for "protesting" when he said he couldn't comply with what he or IRS can't prove as being a Law. I hope many of you can exercise your wit, and pull directly from that INTERNAL REVENUE CODE the mis-placed regulation. The direct URL is from PENSACOLANEWSJOURNAL, and the article is quoted below. The title to this thread is pulled from an opinion of a rogue trustee, alleged "judge."

http://www.pensacolanewsjournal.com/...607070333/1006

Published - July, 7, 2006
Tax evader gets seven years
Dean also ordered to pay $300,000 in unpaid levies

Kristen Rasmussen
@PensacolaNewsJournal.com
A retired Navy commander who is an outspoken tax protester was sentenced to seven years in prison Thursday for tax evasion.

The crime, Senior U.S. District Judge Lacey Collier said, "goes directly to the heart of the existence of our country."

Dr. Ward Franklin Dean, 63, of Pensacola also was ordered to pay nearly $300,000 in taxes that were assessed on the $1.2 million income he earned between 1997 and 2002.

"If we have no one complying with the accepted and long-established tax code, we would have anarchy and we would have no country," Collier said in imposing the sentence, which is more than double the maximum of 3½ years recommended under sentencing guidelines.

Dean, a retired Navy flight surgeon, was convicted in December of six counts of tax evasion and one count of attempting to obstruct the Internal Revenue Service in the collection of taxes.

He was scheduled to be sentenced on the charges in March, but that hearing was postponed to allow time for him to undergo a mental-health evaluation to determine his competency.

His lawyer, Charles McFarland, said at the time that Dean was unable to get along with his attorneys and did not appear to understand the proceedings -- a sentiment Dean displayed Thursday.

"I do not consider myself to be above the law," Dean told Collier, countering claims made by prosecutors. "In fact, I stringently try to obey the law. I still don't know what law I broke. I've written several hundred letters to the IRS trying to get an answer."

But Assistant U.S. Attorneys Robert Davies and David Goldberg countered that if Dean doesn't believe he broke the law, he repeatedly will commit the same crime.

"The jury told him what law he broke. He just doesn't want to hear it," Goldberg said.

Collier said he imposed such a stiff sentence, in part, to serve as a deterrent to other tax protesters. The judge pointed to Dean's Web site, which -- when accessible -- illustrated his role as an "advocate" for like-minded people.

IRS Special Agent Tonya Burgess testified that tax protesters such as Dean eat up time and manpower that can be used to investigate traditional tax evaders.

Tax evaders "submit volumes of frivolous documents claiming frivolous tax laws," she said. "They file frivolous lawsuits that have to be responded to."

ezrhythm · #2 07-07-2006, 04:27 PM

That is truly terrible. May Ward Franklin and his, receive wisdom from the LORD so as to be set free. May he have peace and continued perseverance through his ordeal.
In Jesus' name.

dawgwise · #3 07-07-2006, 06:33 PM

IF you are labeled a "taxpayer," the IRS authority to perform the “Services” they provide are publicly published in the United States Code. Because their authority is already publicly published, when you ask them for their authority the are not required to provide it unless there is some reasonable cause why you should question the authority Congress has already published and given to the corporate U.S. Secretary of Treasury and through that office to the IRS.

Thats why you can ask and ask and ask and they never answer. That is what happened to Ward Dean.

Sickens my heart. And then to make him a specticle by imposing stiffer penalty like he is some trophy to hang on the wall is even worse.

An individual as per title 26 is somebody with a SSN. An individual is a.k.a. "taxpayer."

See SSA 801 to 811 maybe for definitions used and taxes on "wages" etc... and link that to title 26 and title 27 and title 4 105-111 and "they" say it's published and you should know. They also say a pamphlet constitutes legal notice. And along with a bazillion other laws and a hundred million bazillion words of art your supposed to know.

I really wonder what the jury said "the law" was, as per the article posted?

Venezuela is now offering to American Servicemen and women who don't want to participate in illegal wars asylum. 12 cent/gall. gas. Venezuela offered Germans that didn't want to be Nazi's asylum much as Canada did during Viet Nam. If I were a young man I'd join the Army so I could go to Venezula.

RevokeTheTrust · #4 07-07-2006, 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dawgwise

IF you are labeled a "taxpayer," the IRS authority to perform the “Services” they provide are publicly published in the United States Code. Because their authority is already publicly published, when you ask them for their authority the are not required to provide it unless there is some reasonable cause why you should question the authority Congress has already published and given to the corporate U.S. Secretary of Treasury and through that office to the IRS.

Thats why you can ask and ask and ask and they never answer. That is what happened to Ward Dean.

Sickens my heart. And then to make him a specticle by imposing stiffer penalty like he is some trophy to hang on the wall is even worse.

An individual as per title 26 is somebody with a SSN. An individual is a.k.a. "taxpayer."

See SSA 801 to 811 maybe for definitions used and taxes on "wages" etc... and link that to title 26 and title 27 and title 4 105-111 and "they" say it's published and you should know. They also say a pamphlet constitutes legal notice. And along with a bazillion other laws and a hundred million bazillion words of art your supposed to know.

I really wonder what the jury said "the law" was, as per the article posted?

Venezuela is now offering to American Servicemen and women who don't want to participate in illegal wars asylum. 12 cent/gall. gas. Venezuela offered Germans that didn't want to be Nazi's asylum much as Canada did during Viet Nam. If I were a young man I'd join the Army so I could go to Venezula.

It wasn't the fact that no 1040 was filed, it was how he said it that was the mistake. This is another ample figure of how the people couldn't find the words to express that their will isn't what prevented them to file or fail to file. As well, "individual" is a corporate sole.

According to interpretation from Bo, this case had the IRS to cause the man to be held four months in "psychological evaluation" and prevented him from appearing at the Hearing and Sentencing. The people are being stolen into foreign lands one-at-a-time, and the cowardly turkeys around them don't suspect a thing.

As I always say:
Jesus Christ didn't bring a bottle of anal-lubricant for people to passively take away their pain; he brought a Sword. The failure in the people is not to match our spiritual-sword to their carnal-sword, but when the forum is closed to negotiation. There was no Court by the IRS. It's all a military tribunal in same behaviour as contending against a violent criminal. It's not ours to resist, because the resistance is caused by that IRS.

This should be on the microphone of Alex Jones soon enough, and there is no mis-understanding why he would aggresively rebuke and condemn their actions.

No love there, just slave traders. It would be easier to separete the matter, as a man entering their building a slave to another just to prevent them from stealing a slave.

M. Gregory Thomas(tm)

dawgwise · #5 07-07-2006, 09:49 PM

"It wasn't the fact that no 1040 was filed, it was how he said it that was the mistake." Revoke the Trust

Yes, that relates to the Cheek case and an interview I read from the Larkin Rose trial. The juror said that because Larkin seemed to disagree with the way the law was interpreted he had to be found as willful. Now if he had a genuine "misunderstanding" of the law, he could have been found not willful. Of course his motto of prosecute me didn't fare well when it came to not willful.

So it seems they say the law is the law but for so many it seems it is yet to have been clearly articulated.

RevokeTheTrust · #6 07-07-2006, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dawgwise

"It wasn't the fact that no 1040 was filed, it was how he said it that was the mistake." Revoke the Trust

Yes, that relates to the Cheek case and an interview I read from the Larkin Rose trial. The juror said that because Larkin seemed to disagree with the way the law was interpreted he had to be found as willful. Now if he had a genuine "misunderstanding" of the law, he could have been found not willful. Of course his motto of prosecute me didn't fare well when it came to not willful.

So it seems they say the law is the law but for so many it seems it is yet to have been clearly articulated.

I find it ominous how "phille" is taxanomic for love, and to not submit/phille/file to the administration offered by that IRS would find someone as prejudice to a service that offers no benefit other than limit the amount of levy or lien they're turn-coat capacity folds into.

Honourable holders of "dawgwise", I hereby phyle conditionally this post single-phile, for said Subject it descends under for a certain moment and purpose (not falls below).

with rebuked fillibuster,
M. Gregory Thomas(tm)

weishaupt1776 · #7 07-10-2006, 06:26 AM

All U.S. Citizens are liable to pay and file income taxes; that's the law - PERIOD

dawgwise · #8 07-10-2006, 08:59 AM

Question ONE:
Did the jury say what the law was and if so did they state so correctly? Ex: Did the jury say all US CITIZENS must pay the individual income tax and define US CITIZEN?

Problem ONE:
Did Dr. Dean know that he may have waived his birthright and was that disclosed to him or was it somewhat or very well hidden and thus he, along with countless may never know?

weishaupt1776 · #9 07-11-2006, 05:53 AM

I would definitely put in a vote for the "silent judicial notice". However,on the flip side alot of people like Dean, Conces, etc . . . Think that they are U.S. Citizens and any thing you bring up about the 14th amendment U.S. Citizenship presumption is nowheresville

The cases that people have lost did not involve them rectifying their status w/the proper agencies PRIOR to an action and then filing the record of such process into the case jacket

The people who lose just "claim who they are" on their brief and think that that is good enough

dawgwise · #10 07-11-2006, 06:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by weishaupt1776

I would definitely put in a vote for the "silent judicial notice". However,on the flip side alot of people like Dean, Conces, etc . . . Think that they are U.S. Citizens and any thing you bring up about the 14th amendment U.S. Citizenship presumption is nowheresville

The cases that people have lost did not involve them rectifying their status w/the proper agencies PRIOR to an action and then filing the record of such process into the case jacket

The people who lose just "claim who they are" on their brief and think that that is good enough

I believe the above deserves a replay!

BEST EVIDENCE RULE!

I doubt the jury actually knows or stated anything about law as most articles are written to say.

The judge tells the jury something like, "I've determined the law, you (the jury) are only to determine the facts" (and how according to our facts the party in question is guilty)