Wow finding this is like looking for a needle in the proverbial haystack! Any opinions?
TENNESSEE MAN FREED ON TAX CHARGES
Case Number CR-1-03-91, U.S. v. Lloyd Long.
Following is a recent victory for the People, filed in the United States District Court, Eastern District of Tennessee, on October 15, 1993.
This story appeared in the "Independence Newspaper" Jan. 1994
(257 Ringwood Drive, Winter Springs Florida 32708).
In an amazing court case involving the "income tax," a Chattanooga jury agreed with the argument by the defendant that the "income tax" is actually an excise tax which only applies to certain classes of people.
Nationally prominent attorney, Lowell Beacraft of Huntsville, Alabama, assisted by attorney Russell J. Leonard of Sewanee, Tennessee, defended Lloyd R. Long of Decherd, Tennessee, who was charged by the Internal Revenue Service with willful failure to file income tax returns for the years 1989 and 1990.
In presenting the case for the Internal Revenue Service, assistant U.S. Attorney Collier, assisted by special agent Michael Geasley of the IRS, declared that Mr. Long had gross income in excess of $49,000 for each of the years, 1989 and 1990, and that he had "willfully" failed to file income tax returns. The defense admitted that Mr. Long did, in fact, earn such income and that he did not file a return. Long then proceeded to prove to the jury, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he was not "liable" for an income tax, nor was he "required by law" to file.
Defense testimony presented a case titled, Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad, wherein it was the unanimous decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that the Sixteenth Amendment did not give Congress any new power to tax any new subjects. It also showed that the income tax was, in fact, an excise on corporate privileges and privileged occupations. The defense then brought out a case entitled Flint v. Stone Tracy wherein an excise tax was defined as a "tax being laid upon the manufacture, sale and consumption of commodities within the country, upon licenses to pursue certain occupations and upon corporate privileges".
Mr. Long's attorneys also brought out a case entitled Simms v. Arehns, wherein the court ruled that the income tax was neither a property tax nor a tax upon occupations of common right, but was an excise tax. The defense then brought out a case entitled Redfield v. Fisher, wherein the court ruled that the individual, unlike the corporation, cannot be taxed for the mere privilege of existing but that the individual's right to live and own property were natural rights upon which an excise could not be imposed. Defense also pointed to studies done by the Congressional Research Service that confirmed that the income tax is an excise.
Next, the defense pointed out that in the Tennessee Supreme Court case, Jack Cole v. Commissioner, the court ruled that Citizens are entitled by right to income or earnings and that rights could not be taxed as privileges. In another Tennessee Supreme Court case, Corn v. Fort, the court ruled that individuals have a right to combine their activities as partnerships and that this is a natural right, independent and antecedent of government. The Government Prosecutors did not challenge or attempt to refute anv of the cases cited or the conclusions of the courts.
Long's defense brought out in testimony, the fact that nowhere in the entire Internal Revenue Code, was an American Citizen made liable for the graduated income tax. They showed that, in the IRS's own Privacy Act notice, only three sections were cited, and that none of these sections made anyone liable for the income tax. They also proved that this was not an oversight by showing that the alcohol tax was worded so clearly that no one could misinterpret who was made liable for the alcohol tax. The prosecution didn't challenge or attempt to refute this point, nor were they able to show a status that made anyone liable for the income tax.
Mr. Long's defense then presented the mission statement of the Internal Revenue Service, stating that the income tax relied upon "voluntary compliance" and a statement from the head of the alcohol and tobacco tax division of the IRS which showed that the income tax is 100% voluntary as opposed to the alcohol tax which is 100% enforced.
Mr. Long stated that in 1988 he knew that the income tax was an excise tax that could only be imposed upon the exercise of a privilege. He was aware that he was not enjoying any corporate privilege nor was he engaged in any privileged occupation. Long realized that he was merely engaged in an "occupation of common right" that was not taxable as an excise or otherwise. He knew that there was nowhere in the Internal Revenue Code that he was made liable for the income tax and he knew that the income tax was voluntary. However, in spite of these facts, Mr. Long was so intimidated by the IRS that he filed and paid a voluntary assessment.
Long then began writing a series of letters to the IRS explaining that he had no licenses or privileges issued to him by the federal government. He asked for direct answers to simple questions. Instead the IRS inferred, insinuated, extrapolated, beat around the bush and avoided answering his questions. So, Mr. Long testified, he decided to stop "volunteering".
The IRS brought in two "expert" witnesses. Both were actually IRS employees who had received training as professional witnesses. Upon cross-examination by Mr. Becraft, one witness, Ms. Jeu, (after avoiding the question, frustrating the jury and finally being ordered by the judge to answer), admitted: There was, in fact, a secret code known only to the IRS and encoded on Mr. Long's permanent record, that showed that the IRS knew Mr. Lone was not required to file a return!
In summation, Mr. Becraft acknowledged that what the jury had heard, may be in conflict with what the Government had mislead them into believing was true. However, Mr. Beacraft reminded them that Galileo was imprisoned for holding a belief that conflicted with what everyone else believed was fact and that Colwnbus, acting on a contrary belief, discovered a land that no one thought existed.
In a monumental victory, the jury agreed with Long's defense and found Lloyd Long NOT GUILTY on all counts! Mr. Lloyds final statement to a reporter was, "To God be the glory!"
In a blatant example of governmental corruption, and in direct violation of the People's Right to freedom of Speech, the federal government issued a "gag order" on this case. However, as Lila Buchanan, the publisher of the Independence Newspaper stated, "fortunately a transcript of the trial was whisked out of the Courtroom prior to the gag order!" We the People have a complete copy of this transcript available.
finally credit to:
http://www.freedomsite.net/loyd.htm
Apparently he made a paper trail with the irs first then "stopped volunteering"!
(ok for the record I did not do any pi work on this and physically start calling people about it to "absolutely" verify its authenticity so be your own judge or if you are from the area or especially anyone out here who may have been a juror on the case sound up please!)
Otherwise it tends to look official?
