David Williams 3rd wins free room & board

[Steel]

Shoonra,
I read your Yaaahs about the jail sentences people are getting for there efforts, what I take from that is you are in fact a believer in UCC for if it had no power it would also have no consequence.
If I file a false claim that a judge or other legal person was a marcian not an earthing I would not expect to get years in jail.
You give credit through your denial in the face of evidence of a power.
The real heros here are those who try and fail, not those who mock at efforts of patriots, the same patriot spirit that gave birth to this nation.

[ezrhythm]

He also posts these news stories as if he is gloating or cheering that they received such consequences.
At the very least one could be posting some kind of idea for remedy from gubberment intrusion.

...unless of course he is all for it in which that would make him a traitor.

[robhalford88]

Originally Posted by Steel

Shoonra,
I read your Yaaahs about the jail sentences people are getting for there efforts, what I take from that is you are in fact a believer in UCC for if it had no power it would also have no consequence.
If I file a false claim that a judge or other legal person was a marcian not an earthing I would not expect to get years in jail.
You give credit through your denial in the face of evidence of a power.
The real heros here are those who try and fail, not those who mock at efforts of patriots, the same patriot spirit that gave birth to this nation.

Now Steel, go easy on bernie, he has to compensate for micropenis syndrome somehow, so he denigrates those with more courage than he.
Hang on, even a cockroach has more courage than a lawyer!

[farmer_giles_of_ham]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

Defendant: God 'wants me to get rid of' the judge
By JON TEVLIN and DAN BROWNING, Star Tribune staff writers

April 21, 2008

I can understand the Amish, but not the Mennonites! At least not in Pennsylvania. What about the 'old dutch country buffet'?

Maybe--- this is a deliberate misconstruction of someone's words as part of the smear campaign...

[Shoonra]

Yesterday, Monday, May 19th, the Sixth Circuit affirmed the February 2007 conviction of Kenneth Heath, of Shelby Township, Michigan, for multiple counts of tax evasion and one court of passing one of those bogus "bills of exchange" such as DiM has advocated.

Kenneth Heath was a follower of convicted tax scofflaw Irwin Schiff, and in 1963 stopped filing valid tax returns. What he did send the IRS was a blizzard of typical tax scofflaw arguments, including the claim that (although he lived in Michigan) he was a resident of "the California Republic". The IRS gave him an opportunity to refile his tax returns properly, without any fines for his frivolous returns, but he persisted in his antics and ran up more than $45Gs in penalties for improper and frivolous filings.

When the IRS finally charged him with tax evasion for a four year period, they calculated that his taxes owed were slightly more than $37Gs --- so he owed more simply for not filing proper returns than if he had filed proper returns and paid the taxes. But, at this point, he owed both - a total of more than $82,000, thanks to following Schiff's instructions.

Instead of clearing things up, Heath took advice from another crowd of cranks, the American Rights Litigators and Guiding Light of God Ministries, who helped him send the IRS "registered bills of exchange", similar to what we've seen on this forum from DiM and others. In Heath's case, there was a note in tiny type at the end of one of the document that said "void where prohibited by law," and the other was marked Not Negotiable on the back.

Since this "registered bill of exchange" was worthless and fictitiously declared that it would be covered by the US Treasury, it most certainly was prohibited by law, everywhere. This earned Heath a charge that mere money wouldn't solve for trying to pass fictitious obligations.

Once in court, Heath got himself a real lawyer, who managed to get him off on the one count related to the bogus bill of exchange that said "not negotiable". Heath was convicted on four counts of tax evasion and one count of presenting a fictitious obligation (the one with the fine print about "void"). Before sentencing, his lawyer tried to argue that Heath had diminished mental capacity that would negate wrongful intent; considering that Heath was a design engineer and a graduate of California Polytech, the court was unpersuaded. He was sentence to 21 months prison (actually 5 counts of 21 months, but to be concurrent)..

A report of the trial court verdict is at:
http://149.101.1.32/tax/usaopress/20...2-8_kheath.pdf

He appealed and was shot down, yesterday, by the Circuit Court. The decision is already on some websites including Lexis, where it is 2008 u.s.app. LEXIS 10657.
---------- and ...
In the few hours that have elapsed since the above news was posted, I have news of another winner. Michael John Smith of Wyoming ran up a lot of unpaid taxes, then sent the IRS one of those bogus bills of exchange to try to pay it, and was obnoxious to boot, and won himself 3 years of free room and board.

see: http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/txdv08439.htm

[Shoonra]

This very recent decision shows that following Lynne Meredith's instructions won someone 18 months free room and board:

- - - - - - - - - -
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, -v.- JAMES ELLETT, Defendant-Appellant.

Docket No. 07-3682-cr

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 11057

May 16, 2008, Argued

May 23, 2008, Decided

COUNSEL: RONALD JAY COHEN, Cohen, Estis & Associates, LLP, Goshen, NY, for Defendant-Appellant.

PAUL D. SILVER, Assistant United States Attorney (Glenn T. Suddaby, United States Attorney, Northern District of New York, on the brief; Sara Lord, Brenda K. Sannes, Assistant United States Attorneys, of counsel), United States Attorney's Office for the Northern District of New York, Albany, NY, for Appellee.

JUDGES: Before: JACOBS, Chief Judge; MINER, Circuit Judge; MCAVOY, District Judge.*
{*The Honorable Thomas J. McAvoy of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York, sitting by designation.}

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Defendant-Appellant James Ellett appeals from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York (Hurd, J.), convicting him, after a jury trial, on five tax counts. On appeal, Ellett contends that due process required that he be given the opportunity to litigate his tax position civilly or administratively before being prosecuted for tax evasion.

We reject that argument in this opinion. In a separate summary order filed today, we reject Ellett's other challenges to his conviction.** We therefore affirm the judgment below.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Footnotes - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
** In the summary order we reject arguments concerning: (1) the exclusion of legal materials that Ellett claims to have relied upon in forming the view that tax laws were invalid; (2) the exclusion of an IRS agent's tax worksheets and the denial of an adjournment to allow the defense to review another agent's calculations; (3) the admission of evidence of Ellett's prior federal and state tax history; (4) the alleged violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S. Ct. 1194, 10 L. Ed. 2d 215 (1963); (5) the delayed filing of the superseding indictment; and (6) the tone and volume used in delivering the jury charge.
- - - - - - - - - - - - End Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - -


BACKGROUND

Ellett was indicted in the Northern District of New York on September 14, 2006 for three counts of income tax evasion for tax years 2000-2002, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7201. A superseding indictment filed on February 2, 2007 added two counts: tax evasion for tax year 2003, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7201, and misdemeanor failure to file for tax year 2004, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7203. The district court rejected Ellett's requests to dismiss the superseding indictment.

The evidence at trial showed that beginning in 1989 Ellett worked as a skilled mechanic at a public gas and utility company. He received wages and overtime compensation and regularly filed federal and state income tax returns until 1994. That year, at a co-worker's urging, Ellett read Vultures in Eagle's Clothing: Lawfully Breaking Free From Ignorance Related Slavery (1997), a publication by Lynne Meredith that instructs readers how to "LAWFULLY STOP!!! PAYING INCOME TAXES" based on fanciful analyses of the tax laws.

From May 1996 through tax year 2004, Ellett filed an "In Lieu of Form W-4" form (modeled after a sample form included in Vultures), which directed his employer to withhold zero dollars from his income. Thus, although Ellett earned between $ 64,000 and $ 102,000 per year in the period 2000-03, his federal withholding was zero. In the latter half of 2004, at the IRS's instruction, Ellett's employer began withholding taxes from his wages, with the result that $ 8,251 was withheld for 2004 on income of $ 73,376. Ellett did not file federal income tax returns for the 2003 and 2004 tax years. In all, Ellett failed to pay over $ 64,000 in federal income taxes from 2000 through 2004.

Ellett sought to persuade the jury that the prosecution did not prove the willfulness element of tax evasion, because he sincerely believed that, as a native of one of the 50 states who worked for a private employer, he was exercising a "nontaxable right" to engage in labor. Ellett testified that he formulated this belief by reading portions of Vultures in Eagle's Clothing at least one hundred times and by spending hours researching the topic in a law library. On cross-examination Ellett conceded that he knew any tax professional would have disagreed with him (so he never consulted one) and that he was aware that the Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of the federal income tax.

The government undertook to prove willfulness by showing that the IRS had notified Ellett that his legal position had been "rejected repeatedly as frivolous and without merit by the federal courts." Other evidence showed that the New York State Department of Taxation informed Ellett that his legal position was "obviously incorrect" and that it "has been rejected and deemed frivolous by the Tax Appeals Tribunal and federal courts."

The jury found Ellett guilty on all five counts of the superseding indictment. The district court denied Ellett's motions for judgment of acquittal and for a new trial, and on August 10, 2007, sentenced Ellett principally to 18 months' imprisonment.


DISCUSSION

Ellett argues that due process required that he be given the opportunity to litigate his tax position civilly or administratively before being prosecuted for tax evasion. "The elements of tax evasion [under 26 U.S.C. § 7201] are willfulness, the existence of a tax deficiency and an affirmative act of evasion, all of which the government must prove." United States v. Plitman, 194 F.3d 59, 65 (2d Cir. 1999); see United States v. Helmsley, 941 F.2d 71, 97 (2d Cir. 1991) (explaining that the jury must "find a substantial tax deficiency").

The government therefore was required to establish the existence of a substantial tax deficiency beyond a reasonable doubt. To do that, Ellett contends, the government was first required to adjudicate his income tax exemption claim either civilly or administratively. It is undisputed that the Internal Revenue Service never formally audited Ellett and that the United States Tax Court therefore has never ruled on what Ellett believes to be the central legal issue of this case, namely, whether a citizen of one of the 50 states who works for a private employer is subject to the federal income tax.

Ellett misunderstands the tax deficiency element of tax evasion. A tax deficiency arises by operation of law the date a tax return is due but not filed; no formal demand or assessment is required. See 26 U.S.C. § 6151(a) ("[W]hen a return of tax is required under this title or regulations, the person required to make such return shall, without assessment or notice or demand from the Secretary ... pay such tax at the time and place fixed for filing the return ..... " (emphasis added)); id. § 6072(a) (requiring annual tax returns to be filed on or before April 15). Tax liability therefore comes into being as of April 15. A tax deficiency notice "merely reminds the taxpayer of his duty to pay a tax debt already due[, it] does not create that liability." United States v. Voorhies, 658 F.2d 710, 714 (9th Cir. 1981) (internal quotation marks and alterations omitted).

Accordingly, the government is not required to obtain a civil or administrative determination of a tax deficiency in order to establish the existence of a substantial tax deficiency beyond a reasonable doubt. We join the First, Sixth, Seventh and Ninth Circuits in holding that due process does not require the government to adjudicate tax disputes civilly or administratively before proceeding to criminal prosecution for tax evasion. See United States v. Daniel, 956 F.2d 540, 542 (6th Cir. 1992); United States v. Hogan, 861 F.2d 312, 315-16 (1st Cir. 1988); United States v. Dack, 747 F.2d 1172, 1174-75 (7th Cir. 1984); Voorhies, 658 F.2d at 715 (per curiam). Ellett's criminal prosecution was not unlawfully premature.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, and for the additional reasons discussed in our accompanying summary order, we affirm the judgment of conviction below.


-- -- -- -- --





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[David Merrill]

Yesterday, Monday, May 19th, the Sixth Circuit affirmed the February 2007 conviction of Kenneth Heath, of Shelby Township, Michigan, for multiple counts of tax evasion and one court of passing one of those bogus "bills of exchange" such as DiM has advocated.

So Shoonra is here to protect us? Is that why you write here?

At any rate, if the fellow was not redeeming lawful money or relying on HJR-192 to back his letter of credit, then it was nothing I would ever advocate.

What I have been attaching are functional letters of credit. It would be interesting to finally hear from you Shoonra, why you belittle the lawful remedy provided in the Federal Reserve Act.


Regards,

David Merrill.

[Shoonra]

from today's New Orleans Times-Picayune:

- - - - - -,

Feds sink teeth into dentist
Tax nonpayment brings prison time
Thursday, May 29, 2008
By Benjamin Alexander-Bloch
St. Tammany bureau

For 12 years, Dr. Louis Genard, a Slidell dentist, went to imaginative lengths to avoid paying taxes. Unfortunately for him, the Internal Revenue Service and federal prosecutors don't give extra points for creativity.

Despite renouncing his U.S. citizenship and alternately declaring himself a "citizen of the Republic of Louisiana" and an "ambassador to heaven," Genard's attempts at diplomatic immunity were thwarted Wednesday morning when a federal judge sentenced him to 2 1/2 years in prison.

U.S. District Judge A.J. McNamara ordered him to pay $155,683 in restitution and to reimburse the government for prosecution costs. Genard also will be under federal supervision for at least a year after his release.

Genard, 57, was found guilty of three counts of "willfully failing to file income tax returns" by a federal jury in October. He could have gotten three years in prison for each count.

In 1995, a dispute with the IRS began Genard's stint as a tax protester. A pharmacy he had started went under, and while his bank forgave his loan, the IRS required him to pay taxes on that earned income.

Subsequently, he began writing long letters of appeal to the IRS and stopped filing income tax returns in protest.

He soon began associating with various anti-tax groups. They included We the People Foundation, which purports to "end the illegal operations of the income tax system," and Guiding Light of God Ministries, an organization led by longtime tax protester Eddie Kahn that has since been disbanded by a District Court judge in Florida.

In August 1997, Genard renounced his U.S. citizenship, filing an affidavit that declared him a "sovereign citizen of the Republic of Louisiana," which he sent to the IRS.

"I am not now nor have I ever been a citizen of the United States. I am a citizen of the Republic of Louisiana," the document stated.

The IRS began sending him delinquency notices in 1998, and he responded with lengthy arguments referencing tax-protest literature. The IRS eventually responded that it would no longer communicate with him regarding his stance on income taxes.

Then in something of a swan song during the pretrial stages of the recent criminal case in July, Genard filed a motion seeking dismissal of the charges on the grounds that his status as "Ambassador and Citizen of the Kingdom of Heaven under its King Jesus the Christ" gave him diplomatic immunity from federal jurisdiction. The motion was rejected.

Many anti-tax groups attack the constitutionality of the 16th Amendment that established the federal government's right to levy taxes. Some groups also argue that income taxes violate the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.

U.S. Attorney Jim Letten condemned Genard's actions and said his sentencing "sends a strong message to tax protesters that such arrogant challenges to the payment of federal income taxes will not be tolerated."

. . . . . . .

[mrg]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

from today's New Orleans Times-Picayune:

- - - - - -,

Feds sink teeth into dentist
Tax nonpayment brings prison time
Thursday, May 29, 2008
By Benjamin Alexander-Bloch
St. Tammany bureau

For 12 years, Dr. Louis Genard, a Slidell dentist, went to imaginative lengths to avoid paying taxes. Unfortunately for him, the Internal Revenue Service and federal prosecutors don't give extra points for creativity.

Despite renouncing his U.S. citizenship and alternately declaring himself a "citizen of the Republic of Louisiana" and an "ambassador to heaven," Genard's attempts at diplomatic immunity were thwarted Wednesday morning when a federal judge sentenced him to 2 1/2 years in prison.

U.S. District Judge A.J. McNamara ordered him to pay $155,683 in restitution and to reimburse the government for prosecution costs. Genard also will be under federal supervision for at least a year after his release.

Genard, 57, was found guilty of three counts of "willfully failing to file income tax returns" by a federal jury in October. He could have gotten three years in prison for each count.

In 1995, a dispute with the IRS began Genard's stint as a tax protester. A pharmacy he had started went under, and while his bank forgave his loan, the IRS required him to pay taxes on that earned income.

Subsequently, he began writing long letters of appeal to the IRS and stopped filing income tax returns in protest.

He soon began associating with various anti-tax groups. They included We the People Foundation, which purports to "end the illegal operations of the income tax system," and Guiding Light of God Ministries, an organization led by longtime tax protester Eddie Kahn that has since been disbanded by a District Court judge in Florida.

In August 1997, Genard renounced his U.S. citizenship, filing an affidavit that declared him a "sovereign citizen of the Republic of Louisiana," which he sent to the IRS.

"I am not now nor have I ever been a citizen of the United States. I am a citizen of the Republic of Louisiana," the document stated.

The IRS began sending him delinquency notices in 1998, and he responded with lengthy arguments referencing tax-protest literature. The IRS eventually responded that it would no longer communicate with him regarding his stance on income taxes.

Then in something of a swan song during the pretrial stages of the recent criminal case in July, Genard filed a motion seeking dismissal of the charges on the grounds that his status as "Ambassador and Citizen of the Kingdom of Heaven under its King Jesus the Christ" gave him diplomatic immunity from federal jurisdiction. The motion was rejected.

Many anti-tax groups attack the constitutionality of the 16th Amendment that established the federal government's right to levy taxes. Some groups also argue that income taxes violate the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.

U.S. Attorney Jim Letten condemned Genard's actions and said his sentencing "sends a strong message to tax protesters that such arrogant challenges to the payment of federal income taxes will not be tolerated."

. . . . . . .

Sounds like something straight out of the Roman Empire to me.

Nothing new under the sun.

My how "advanced" and "modern" we have become.

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by David Merrill

It would be interesting to finally hear from you Shoonra, why you belittle the lawful remedy provided in the Federal Reserve Act.

That was probably in response.

Shoonra just gets a kick out of misery.



Regards,

David Merrill.