Hank Goltz interviews Cindy Neun
Our government's ability to incarcerate innocent people is evidenced by the number of those being exonerated, most often through DNA evidence. These wrongful convictions evidence our judicial system's failure. Trial Logs is currently covering the government's prosecution of those who question the application of the income tax laws. It is our hope that this coverage will help us understand the failings of our justice system and help those struggling to comprehend this nation's income tax laws.
Saturday, October 01, 2005
Trial update from Angela Stark
My notes from Sept 29th
First let me say that we overheard the government attys ask each other if they "caught last nights blog". Duh! Hi guys!
Today, jury Instructions were given re 6331(h) which they said was enacted after Irwin's 96 seizure of his car and some cash so they said it wasn't relevant to his seizure. Irwin reiterated the relevance of the law of 6331 and why congress wrote it into the 1998 R&R Act . Irwin wanted to recall Luddy Tally but the judge said no. The judge told Irwin he may not mention any legal issues or statutes in front of the jury. (so what else is new?)
Irwin wanted to enter the summons tape that occurred between him, agt Tally and Gritis. However, the Judge wouldn't allow the summons tape to be played nor Irwin's criminal complaint against them to be entered. The judge said "it doesn't matter!"
Agt Tally said that he had closed the account file on Irwin as it was getting to the 10 year point. And said that the government objects to litigating cases that are hopeless to collect. He mentioned that if it was under a certain dollar amount... Irwin asked what is the amount, and the judge cut in and said it wasn't relevant (which is par for this judge). Tally said the file never goes away and continues with the penalties and interest, but it goes into suspension. But, Good ole Gritis (they say he is now deceased, but he is probably alive and kicking, they just gave him a new name to avoid being called as a witness) re-opened Irwin's file and went after Irwin's social security. Not 15% but 100% percent. They have been taking it all since 1996. (nice huh?)
CDP Hearings ... Irwin put the governments witness, appeals team manager Mr. Menaugh (who was there to testify against Cindy) to the wall with questions regarding his authority. It was great! Irwin went step by step from the time you get the first letter, up to why a person would ask for a cdph, then adverse determination, to the point where he verified, that "the appeals officer has no authority, which is why you have to go to the tax court!" I thought the jury was going to stand up and applaud. It was a thing of beauty. The judge was pissed. The government got up and objected, but it was too late. I wish you could have been there. Irwin was hot! I believe EVERYBODY GOT IT! Irwin established that the IRS has no authority.
Irwin is making it perfectly clear what his beliefs are. He is so passionate about it. The court appointed lawyers cross examined Mr. Menaugh too.
Chad Bowers is Larry's appointed lawyer and he's Sharp as a whip! He stood up and asked the judge questions about what a levy and continuous levy is. He didn't know the difference and really wanted to know. He was very surprised when it wasn't explained. The judge interrupted and changed the questioning.
Thomas Menaugh Team Appeals manager (33 yrs with the IRS with a staff of six in Las Vegas) now located in Arizona, said that the IRS uses "Choice Point" to get their information. He said they use Choice Point because their info is more current than the IRS's. He participated in CDPH's when Cindy was an advocate for a man named Matthew Diamond. Matthew Diamond was former NYPD and also a bailiff. Mr. Menaugh testified that they used the Pierson case as Notice of the IRS's position to Cindy. Irwin brought out that it wasn't a real case, then it came out that they gave the document to the non taxpayer and not to Cindy. Cindy anticipated this and her lawyer and Irwin got the tape of the actual CDPH played for the jury with a written transcript projected up on a large screen so the jury could read along with the audio. The jury and the defense got a very good lesson from it too. Cindy wasn't allowed to speak at the cdph, but Mr. Diamond did his presentation really well and asked for the required documents. Mr. Menaugh, The poor guy, couldn't clean up his testimony after that. I thought it was glorious! I believe the jury got it.
Irwin asked the witness (I forget which one) if the IRS's web site explains tax court. The witness said no. The jury got it.
Yesterday the judge told Irwin that Bob Schulz's 2nd circuit court decision re summonses wasn't relevant to his court, so today along with the above line of testimony regarding the Pierson case, Irwin asked the judge, well if this court isn't held to 2nd circuit court decisions, how can it be held to tax court decisions? The jury got it.
They got into the 1998 R&R Act and when liability was raised by Irwin and Cindy's lawyer, the government objected. The judge sustained the objection. The jury got it. And it's refreshing to see the defense attys are getting it too. The more they learn the more they are stating their own objections and covering for Irwin' s lack of procedural knowledge. However the judge never sustains their objections. Of course. Judge Dawson is so predictable. But, I have a feeling it's backfiring on them.
It was mentioned by Mr. Menaugh that the NOD requires an assessment and is a DEFAULT. But we already knew that, didn't we.
Next witness Audrey Garder testified that Irwin's business wasn't registered as a seller with the state. Irwin spelled out the Nevada constitution and the fact that it precludes taxes on tapes and records etc... They ultimately changed the locks on Freedom Books and forced Irwin to pay for the registration to get the keys. Irwin made a complaint. He brought up the OSC hearing and had to use the transcript (they didn't know he had) to refresh her memory on it as she couldn't recall it. (These people have terrible memories.) Irwin and the defense lawyers objected to her personal opinions, so the judge gave a jury instruction as to the witnesses personal opinions of what the law meant to her.
Another retired IRS appeals officer Ms. Fisher (she said she also trained newbie's) had meetings with Cindy and the non taxpayer. The government mentioned publication 2105 is what they use to deal with taxpayers questions and of course their web site. www.irs.gov Irwin and the defense for Larry and Cindy cross examined Ms Fisher.
Regarding Irwin's poor hearing and eyesight, The judge, toward the end of the day told Irwin to fill out "the form" and give it to the court reporter and they will let him see what the judge sees on his screen. However the governments testimony is almost over, so if Irwin loses, it could still be appealed on that issue alone. This is not a fair trial to say the least. But even then, we would still need to find a fair judge.
Listen to Irwin's audio blogs for this day click just above where it says "posted by David Jahn @ 9/29/2005 10:50:42 PM" and this one "posted by David Jahn @ 9/29/2005 11:50:49 PM" on www.triallogs.blogspot.com for more from Irwin that I am not covering in this e-mail.
No court on Friday.
The good part will come when the defense brings their witnesses. I think there is a good chance of Irwin, Cindy and Larry winning, but if the government taints the jury... Would they stoop that low? I wouldn't put it past them...
Just Keep the faith!
The governments attorneys are such characters. Mr. Ingal (I believe his name is) looked so familiar to me. For 4 days I was trying to put my finger on it. And today it dawned on me. Linddie England! Sans the cigarette, He could be her twin brother. Right down to the haircut. I kid you not. If the picture doesn't come thru, email me.
The other, I think his name is Neiman, reminds me of an exclamation point that is always smiling. More of a cartoon character with a perpetual shit eating grin.
There is one that is a bit older and very quiet that sits right behind the governments table. He must be their lead council. He's the tall and handsome one. He is the best dressed in the place and has a lovely smile. If he wasn't married... Yes, I asked him. Actually I wanted to ask him to dinner. Oh well... I believe he is the one that wanted me to remove my Irwin Schiff T-shirt today, because they were "afraid" it would influence the jury. I guess they are worried. I was told by one of the security officers to just turn it inside out. So I did. No biggie. I didn't wear it with that in mind. I wore it to show Irwin support. So much for freedom of speech, eh? I wonder how they would have reacted to my Jail 4 Judges t-shirt?
Everything the government is doing is going to backfire on them. The jury is witnessing the blatant abuse of the IRS along with the judges help and I believe the jury is now looking at Irwin as their grandpa. A grandpa you can't help, but love and be proud of.
Irwin's the odds-on favorite.
Now make your flight arrangements for Vegas. http://www.flyted.com/
Have a great weekend!
Irwin Schiff News
Join a tax workshop in your city here http://www.lawmenamerica.com
Subscribe/Un-subscribe to IS News e-mail here http://irwinschiff.homestead.com/Subscribe.html
Disclaimer: Irwin Schiff News posts the above information and web sites for educational purposes only and referral to them is not to be construed as an endorsement or legal advice. All Irwin Schiff News (IS News) text messages are presumed to be first amendment protected freedom of speech on issues of importance to the Civilian population of the United States of America. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
Thursday, September 29, 2005
Irwin Schiff Trial Coverage by Freedom Law School (Segment 2 of 2)
Wednesday, September 28, 2005
Tuesday, September 27, 2005
I'm compelled to comment, on all of the bickering that is taking place on the commentary areas of this blog.
First, let's understand our environment.
With a national debt around $8 trillion, this nation has become the worlds leading debtor. Loans from countries such as China, Korea, and Japan are all that is keeping us afloat.
In 1960, we produced and sold more products than we bought and this nation had a $4.5 billion trade surplus. Today, that is no longer true. We now have a trade deficit approaching $800 billion. Rising oil prices and natural disasters such as the two hurricanes that recently struck the gulf region assure matters will only worsen.
In 1930, expenditures by the federal government amounted to just 3.6% of the GDP. Today, it spends over 18% of the GDP. One big difference is that prior to 1930, there were virtually no social programs. Today social programs account for 59% of the national budget.
In 1948, the federal government took just 2% of the income from a family of four. Today, it takes over 25%. One source estimates that today's families, in all, are on the governments treadmills for 52% of their incomes.
Looking at historic graphs, you'll see that as taxes rise, savings fall. And as taxes fall, savings rise. So, it should come as no surprise that now when our taxes are at an all time high, our citizens have no savings and are struggling to provide for their families.
Now, you might think our elected officials surely are working to alleviate this problem. Unfortunately, they're not. In fact, I would say they're making matters worse. As a result of high taxes, over regulation, and international trade agreements, many of our manufacturing jobs have been forced to leave the country.
In the midst of this decline, the corruption of our court system has become intolerable. Numerous supreme court rulings make it clear that they no longer view the constitution as a ruling document. The courts have stripped us of our privacy, our gun rights, our property rights and more. We now lead the world in the number of our citizens that are incarcerated within our prisons. We have members of our society, including members of the bar, that have dedicated their lives to fighting judicial corruption at all levels, something I've seen first hand at all levels.
I hope all of you who are following these trials will recognize the failure of our system and the mean spirited nature of the oppressors who side with the government in these trials. The purpose of this blog is to help us form a better understanding of a judicial system that successfully prosecutes far too many innocent people.
The income tax honesty movement provides an interestingting case study. Here we have a group of people who have asked specific question which the government chooses to evade. They have asked the government to meet with them to settle grievances, but the government refuses. And, when they get people to trial, well you can see what is going on here.
The current trial of Irwin Schiff provides us with a example of how the system is failing the citizens of this nation. The judge and prosecution work in concert. The defendant is verbally and physically abused and hog tied as to what they can present in their defense. Observers are harassed and banned from the court. It doesn't get much worse than this folks.
Gerry Spence says the following about judges in his book, O.J. The Last Word beginning on page 170,
"Night after night on the talk shows, I heard criticism being leveled at Judge Ito. But I took a different position, born of years spent enduring the relentless abuse of tyrant judges, from having seen my clients' rights placed in severe jeopardy at the hands of blockheads in robes whose only claim to judicial excellence was their ability to scream and shout and intimidate everyone who came before them. Ask trial lawyers who have been around the block even once, and they will tell you that many judges mammal eating monsters that feed on lawyers and their cases, trample over justice, and spew their venom randomly over the courtroom because they do not possess the intelligence or judicial temperment to preside over a fair trial.
"Courtroom are frightening places. Nothing grows in a courtroom--no pretty pansies, no little children laughing and playing. A courtroom is a deadly place. People die in courtrooms, killed by words. If you wake up someday in a courtoom and long to tell your story to someone who can hear and understand you, someone who will give a damn, who will give you a just hearing, you will be shocked. You want to tell the jury that you are being railroaded? You aren't allowed to speak. Your lawyer isn't, either. Perhaps he can sputter. He can object. He can bow and scrape before the judge. If he's not too frightened of the despot up there, he can crowd into the half hour, arbitrarily allowed by the judge, an opening statement that should take at least two hours.
"I have seen those judges pace back and forth across that little stage up there, smirking, peering down, hollering, interrupting. I have seen them nail lawyers to podiums like goats tied to a stake, or banish them to counsel table like lepers. Your lawyer can't communicate tied to a stake or banished to a tabletop. I see judges who, the day before they ascended to the bench, couldn't ask the first intelligent question on voir dire, but who, the day after, sat up there as a judge, carrying on voir dire for the litigants that, if I had conducted it, would have been adjudged as gross malpractice. Often the result is the selection of a jury riddled with prejudice or jurors who predisposed to convict. I watch judges bully prospective jurors into saying what the judge wishes them to say. I hear them read instructions to the jury that are critical to justice but that no one, not even the lawyer who submitted the instructions, can understand. I, and every other lawyer who has practiced more than a few years, have endured their intemperance, which so often leads to error and pain and injustice. I see them rule one way one day and another way another day, depending on what they had for breakfast. God help you if you come before such a judge after he has had a bad night under the connubial covers."
Obviously, Gerry Spence holds a low opinion of judges, and obviously if judges treat Gerry Spence in this manner, you can imagine how they treat a citizen trying to defend themselves.
Another interesting aspect in following this trial are the comments coming from the pro government (quatloos) types. These are most likely IRS employees and CPA's. They are likely people whose livelyhoods are dependent upon the system in its current form. These oppressors portray themselves as elitist who insult anyone that disagrees with them using condescending and demeaning tones.
There are those that produce and then there are those that prey on those that produce. These folks are the latter. They apparently delight in the suffering of others because their livelyhood depends on it. That is the only explanation I can come up with to explain their perverse behavior.
Here is the bottom line. No one, innocent or guilty, should have to suffer through a trial like the one we are following here in Nevada. As Mark Yannone stated
"Once a society recognizes that justice is impossible in a court of law, violence will escalate radically, and no one will be immune from it."
What we are witnessing one case at a time is the ruin of a nation. Anyone that finds delight in these abusive trials is mentally suspect. Maybe they'll finally realize the error of their ways when fate puts them in front of one of these judges.
Monday, September 26, 2005
Cohen, Schiff & Neun Trial Update, Doug Kenline interview with Mike Goldman the Radio Rebel
You can catch Mike on the radio on Saturday nights at Crusade Radio