Admissibility of Theft By Deception Video
(Trial audio included at end)

Arriving at the truth should always be the goal of the courts. Surely, anyone who has seen the "Theft By Deception" video would agree that it affectively conveys Larken's beliefs. Surely, it is a vital part of understanding whether or not Larken Rose acted willfully, one of the vital elements required to validate the government's "willful failure to file" charges.

The courts quest to arrive at the truth unfortunately takes a backseat to the government's objections to showing the jury this video. They claim it is hearsay and that it would "confuse" the jury.

The evidence would suggest our government along with thousands of others have been confused by the serious questions raised by Larken Rose through this video regarding the common interpretations of this nations income tax laws. It is apparent that the government wants to prevent this confusion regarding our nations income tax laws from spreading to the jury.

Judge Baylson's request for a table of authorities supporting Mr. Rose's desire to show the video shoulders Larken Rose with the burden of proving the video is admissible. Obviously, Larken Rose needs this video to prove his innocence and the notion that one is innocent until proven guilty becomes an aberration. This emphasizes the need for an effective legal research team as it is near impossible for one person to do it all.

Larken Rose is apparently unable to produce the table of authorities supporting his need to show the jury his video. His failure to overcome the governments objections leads him to settle for showing the jury five minutes of the video without audio. Thus, the government succeeds in neutralizing Larken Rose's defense and insulates the jury from the truth regarding Mr. Rose and his extensive research.

The government needs to win this case and they need to make an example of Mr. Rose. Their objection to showing the video makes it obvious that the last thing they need is for the truth regarding Mr. Rose's beliefs to overtake the courtroom.

You be the judge.