Simkanin Conviction Affirmed on Appeal

[Libertarian]

http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions...31-CR0.wpd.pdf

[weishaupt1776]

The income tax is not voluntary for U.S Citizens

[BOBT12]

This court seems to be happy with a "directed jury", they indicate it was irrelevent.

They seem to actually rely on some unpublished decisions. This seems very unfair.

In short, it seems to be evidence of an additional unjust decision, by yet, another court that is supporting the IRS fraud.

[wisper]

Originally Posted by BOBT12

This court seems to be happy with a "directed jury", they indicate it was irrelevent.

They seem to actually rely on some unpublished desicisions. This seems very unfair.

In short, it seems to be evidence of an additional unjust decision, by yet, another court that is supporting the IRS fraud.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.

I am not experienced in these trials, or in research, but I am more than casually interested! Based on the comments from the court, it looks like the defense blew it by not getting the right stuff (instead of all the WTP stuff)

If they had kept the evidence to a reasonable amount, it probably would have gone better y'think? What is on my mind is that right up front, the IRC should have been the evidence, establishing that the definitions of words in the irc, like, person, employee, employer, receiving agent for taxes etc., would have shown the jury why the belief was well-founded and beyond arguement. If you believe that the taxes apply to gov't. emploees, why is the IRC misleading. It also sounds like one shouldn't say very much, make the point, make it salient, and leave it to the prosecutor to challenge.I am concerned that he tried to bring forward every arguement and belef in not only the honesty movement, but maybe protestor stuff as well! I read the entire decision like it was a chess game. Think ahead, several moves, and don't confuse your own strategy. Also, I think that it was in error to have WTP, and others there to get the Gov't in a *must win* mode. 20-20 HS!

[wisper]

I forgot to ask, what are his options now. Does he get to appeal the supremes?

[Livefire]

only if they grant certorari........otherwise that is as far as he can go in the system.

[Ice]

Originally Posted by wisper

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.

I am not experienced in these trials, or in research, but I am more than casually interested! Based on the comments from the court, it looks like the defense blew it by not getting the right stuff (instead of all the WTP stuff)

If they had kept the evidence to a reasonable amount, it probably would have gone better y'think? What is on my mind is that right up front, the IRC should have been the evidence, establishing that the definitions of words in the irc, like, person, employee, employer, receiving agent for taxes etc., would have shown the jury why the belief was well-founded and beyond arguement. If you believe that the taxes apply to gov't. emploees, why is the IRC misleading. It also sounds like one shouldn't say very much, make the point, make it salient, and leave it to the prosecutor to challenge.I am concerned that he tried to bring forward every arguement and belef in not only the honesty movement, but maybe protestor stuff as well! I read the entire decision like it was a chess game. Think ahead, several moves, and don't confuse your own strategy. Also, I think that it was in error to have WTP, and others there to get the Gov't in a *must win* mode. 20-20 HS!

In an earlier thread I had pointed out several instances at which his attorneys missed the opportunity to OBJECT which would have resulted in many of the errors committed by the judge being reviewed before the end of the trial... which in turn could have resulted in a better outcome or even a mistrial.

One such instance is related in the above .pdf:

The court further instructed the jury that:
Within the meaning of [26 U.S.C. § 7202], during the years 2000, 2001, and 2002, [Arrow], through its responsible officials, had a legal duty to collect, by withholding from the wages of its employees, the employees’ share of social security taxes, Medicare taxes, and federal income taxes, and to account for those taxes and to pay withheld amounts to the United States of America.

Simkanin did not object to these instructions at the time they were given.

The rule of thumb is: If you do not raise an objection then you have no objection. I do believe that the Jury should have been the appropriate party to decide whether or not Simkanin had a "legal duty to collect," withhold and pay the withheld amounts. When the Judge stated this to be accepted fact he did, regardless of what the appeals court stated, "sway" the jury.

One thing is that the prosecuter had a motion in limine which prohibited the defense from using the definition of "employee" in his defense. The railroading was obvious and this courts performance hasn't swayed anyone from following the path of truth -- regardless of the fact that this judge rejects it.

As I previously stated, it is a wonder he is still a judge. If I were within his district I would be moving for his removal through the proper channels. But, regardless of the judges actions, the attorneys didn't perform as well as they could have.

Ice

[jeffmar10]

This just shows how corrupt the judiciary is, Sec. 7202 is a penalty statute.
It only comes into play after you have been convected, not before. You can't break a penalty statute, they are only guide lines that the judge uses during the
sentencing phase of the trial, but only after convection. It would be like someone on trial for murder violating a sentence of "life imprison without parole". These judges should be thrown from the bench. Their crimes from the bench dwarf that of Hitler.