Tom Cryer Victory

[yebliker]

The issue was whether he "willfully failed to file" or not. I read his brief, and it states all the reasons that Cryer was justified in not believing that he was required to file. The crux of the "willful failure" argument is that one knew that the law required certain actions, and that one still failed to perform. Tommy Cryer proved that he knew otherwise. The IRS will have to try a new approach.
-Yebliker

[David Merrill]

I am just saying please link us to the court clerk with a case #. Maybe we can go from there?

[psholtz]

Originally Posted by David Merrill

I am just saying please link us to the court clerk with a case #. Maybe we can go from there?

This may be a start:

United States v. Cryer, case no. 5:06-cr-50164-SMH-MLH-ALL, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, Shreveport Division

[ThomPaine]

Originally Posted by rottweiler

Administrative notice must be given to the IRS with proof that the NFTL is unenforcable and they will get off your back forever.

Didnt work for me, but that could be for any number of reasons. I still hear from them about once or twice a year, usually a form letter of some type, so I am just letting it all sit for now. AFAIK, the NFTL is still there, havent checked in a while. I have no earnings and have no property in my legal name, so it doesnt hurt me at all..

Thom

[rottweiler]

You can not say it didn't work because what you did was not what I am talking about. I told you that when I found out what you were doing and you ignored me. You must include proof in your letter that the NFTL is legally unenforcable.

I do thank you for starting that thread because it helped me find the key and I still find it hilarious that everyone ignored me when I found it. It was as if this forum was crawling with government disinfo. agents.

Originally Posted by ThomPaine

Didnt work for me, but that could be for any number of reasons. I still hear from them about once or twice a year, usually a form letter of some type, so I am just letting it all sit for now. AFAIK, the NFTL is still there, havent checked in a while. I have no earnings and have no property in my legal name, so it doesnt hurt me at all..

Thom

[indago]

Mr. Cryer is a lawyer. He said that in his effort to help a friend, who had come to him with some tax material, stay out of trouble, he researched the material and found it to be credible. He began to apply the research to his own life, and wrote to government asking questions concerning the tax laws. His response from government: "your position is frivolous". He said: "I had never stated a position, so how could they know whether it was frivolous?" He was charged with two counts of criminal tax evasion and wilful failure to file tax returns, although the charges of tax evasion were dropped before trial. He told the jury that he worked for a living and the remuneration that he received for his services was compensation for his efforts. There was no gain or profit there to be taxed as "income". He also noted: "I think now people are beginning to realize that this has got to be the largest fraud, backed up by intimidation and extortion and by the sheer force of taking peoples property and hard-earned money without any lawful authorization whatsoever". The jury could relate to this, and found him not guilty.

[BOBT12]

Originally Posted by indago

Mr. Cryer is a lawyer. He said that in his effort to help a friend, who had come to him with some tax material, stay out of trouble, he researched the material and found it to be credible. He began to apply the research to his own life, and wrote to government asking questions concerning the tax laws. His response from government: "your position is frivolous". He said: "I had never stated a position, so how could they know whether it was frivolous?" He was charged with two counts of criminal tax evasion and wilful failure to file tax returns, although the charges of tax evasion were dropped before trial. He told the jury that he worked for a living and the remuneration that he received for his services was compensation for his efforts. There was no gain or profit there to be taxed as "income". He also noted: "I think now people are beginning to realize that this has got to be the largest fraud, backed up by intimidation and extortion and by the sheer force of taking peoples property and hard-earned money without any lawful authorization whatsoever". The jury could relate to this, and found him not guilty.

Thanks for posting this information. When I asked questions regarding my alleged taxes, which I demanded that someone respond under penalty of perjury, as the code, and common sense, suggest, I got no real response. For a number of years I would get some letter which stated that someone would respond in 45 days, yet, there was no response after the time was up. Finally, after years I got a form letter saying that my position was frivolous. This is outrageous, if the IRS is charged with the collection of taxes, they should be made to answer questions under penalty of perjury, just as the public is expected to do. Certainly, this should absolutely be the case before any prosecution takes place.

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by ThomPaine

Didnt work for me, but that could be for any number of reasons. I still hear from them about once or twice a year, usually a form letter of some type, so I am just letting it all sit for now. AFAIK, the NFTL is still there, havent checked in a while. I have no earnings and have no property in my legal name, so it doesnt hurt me at all..

Thom

Anything purchased with private credit from the Fed has an inherent First Lien by the Treasury.

[psholtz]

Originally Posted by David Merrill

Anything purchased with private credit from the Fed has an inherent First Lien by the Treasury.

I've heard this from several other people as well..

Is there a reference for this? How can one look this up?

[phreeman2003]

Under the new law the money is issued to the bank in return for Government obligations, bills of exchange, drafts, notes, trade acceptances, and banker's acceptances. The money will be worth 100 cents on the dollar, because it is backed by the credit of the nation. It will represent a mortgage on all the homes and other property of all the people in the nation.

This comes from a recent thread attachment by either David or Trooper (my apologies, if I credit the wrong member), which reads 1933 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 83 (I believe 83 would be it's page number), across the top of the page.

Now, the above plus David's often referenced 12 U.S.C. sec. 411 makes total logical sense, as there's no lawyerly twisting or turning about.