PDA

View Full Version : IRS Suffers Staggering Defeat




G-khan
10-01-2007, 09:16 PM
http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org...2007-09-30.htm (http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/UPDATE/Update2007-09-30.htm)

September 30, 2007


Media Blackout: 161 Federal Tax Charges, 0 Convictions

IRS Suffers Staggering Defeat

Tax Questions Raised Regarding

Gold and Silver Coins Used to Pay Wages

Around noon on Monday, September 17th, a Las Vegas federal jury returned its verdict refusing to convict nine defendants of any of the 161 federal tax crimes they had been charged with. The charges included income tax evasion, willful failure to file and conspiracy to evade taxes.

The four-month trial centered around the family businesses of Robert Kahre who paid numerous workers for their labor with circulating gold and silver U.S. coins, and did not report the wages. The payments took place over several years, allegedly totaling at least $114 million dollars.

On September 20, 2007, three days after the federal trial's dramatic conclusion, the Las Vegas Review Journal, reportedly under a degree of public pressure, ran its first (and last) story about the outcome of the trial. To this day, with exception of the single article by the Review Journal, no major media entity has published a news story regarding the outcome of this important federal criminal tax case.

The censorship of this important news story is, unfortunately, not unexpected given the continuing, worldwide onslaught against the U.S. "dollar" -- specifically the Federal Reserve variety, and the ever growing numbers of Federal Reserve Notes required to trade for an actual ounce of silver, gold, oil, or for that matter, anything.

In short, this failed prosecution has coalesced and exposed truths our Government desperately needs to hide from the People: the truth about our money, the truth about our (privately-owned) central bank, and the truth about the fraudulent nature of the operation and enforcement of the federal income tax system.

Click here to read the April, 2005 DOJ press release announcing the prosecution.
Click here to read the 9/20 story by the Review Journal about the trial.

According to defense attorney Joel Hansen, who represented co-defendant Alex Loglia, the primary "willfulness" defense was that the defendants believed they had no legal obligation to withhold, pay income taxes or report anything to the government because, in part, the nominal (i.e., face value) of the gold and silver coins is so small as to fall beneath the reporting thresholds set by the Internal Revenue Code.

The Defendants also argued that regardless of the valuation of the coins for internal revenue purposes, there is no law that requires average American workers to file or pay direct, un-apportioned taxes on the fruits of their labor.

The Government argued that the payments in solid gold and silver U.S. coins must be considered at their bullion (i.e., intrinsic full-market) value when considering the worth of the wages for purposes of the internal revenue code.

Attorney Hansen cited two Supreme Court cases bolstering Defendant's monetary argument at the heart of the defendants "willfulness" defense.

The essence of the argument is that under the Constitution Congress is obligated by law to mint and circulate such coins as demand requires, and must establish the value of coins as they are used as legal tender, but the coins' market value, arising as valuable personal "property," is a distinct, separate attribute of such coins, and is of no legal consequence if the coins are used as legal tender.

In other words, if a worker is paid with such coins, his taxable "income" (if any) can only be the face value indicated upon the coin money paid -- i.e., $1.00 for a circulating silver dollar or $50 for a circulating gold U.S. coin. Not surprisingly, the IRS has never issued any public guidance regarding this significant issue.

The first case, Ling Su Fan v. U.S., 218 US 302 (1910) establishes the legal distinction of a coin bearing the "impress" of the sovereign:

"These limitations are due to the fact that public law gives to such coinage a value which does not attach as a mere consequence of intrinsic value. Their quality as a legal tender is an attribute of law aside from their bullion value. They bear, therefore, the impress of sovereign power which fixes value and authorizes their use in exchange."

The second case, Thompson v. Butler, 95 US 694 (1877), establishes that the law makes no legal distinction between the values of coin and paper money used as legal tender:

"A coin dollar is worth no more for the purposes of tender in payment of an ordinary debt than a note dollar. The law has not made the note a standard of value any more than coin. It is true that in the market, as an article of merchandise, one is of greater value than the other; but as money, that is to say, as a medium of exchange, the law knows no difference between them."

Defense attorney Hansen confirmed that members of the jury were able to actually hold and inspect the gold and silver U.S. coins paid to the workers.

After almost four months of testimony and three and a half days of deliberation, the jury did not convict any of the defendants of any of the 161 crimes alleged. Although some defendants were acquitted of multiple counts, and several were acquitted completely, others may have to stand for a retrial if the Government brings charges a second time.

The Review Journal reported the jury foreman claimed DOJ prosecutors admitted they were "shocked" by the outcome.

In March 2007, the primary defendant, Bob Kahre, filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the prosecutor and IRS agents who had conducted what he alleges to be an unlawful search and seizure raid. In 2005, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals refused to overturn a previous District Court ruling holding that the federal prosecutor is not entitled to absolute immunity for the unlawful raid.

The media suppression of this story is similar to the widespread mainstream media suppression of the July 11, 2007 acquittal of Louisiana attorney Tommy Cryer who was also charged with multiple federal income tax crimes and relied upon numerous Supreme Court precedents and U.S. tax laws to establish his "willfulness" defense. Click here for a previous WTP update containing a link to Cryer's 100-page Motion to Dismiss which details his legal arguments.

Click here to execute a Google News archive search to attempt to locate news stories about Tommy Cryer's tax trial.

Kregener
10-01-2007, 09:27 PM
Hoo-FRIGGIN-Ray!

Now if we just get Ron Paul elected...

dude58677
10-02-2007, 07:05 AM
Hoo-FRIGGIN-Ray!

Now if we just get Ron Paul elected...

The jurors were probably following the Ron Paul's message of freedom. Ron Paul was the real defense attorney in this case.

freedominnumbers
10-02-2007, 07:22 AM
The problem is all the cases who win are doing so on 'willfulness'.

Getting off is getting off, but getting off on a willfulness defense doesn't do anything as far as providing precedent that the income tax is illegal. All it means is that these people truly believed they didn't have to pay.

When somebody gets off on the basis of the law being unenforceable or unconstitutional I'll really cheer.

The feds are smart, if they ever get in a position where there is the slightest chance they could lose they use charges whose minimum defense is 'willfulness' ensuring that regardless of the outcome it will have no effect on their next case.

dude58677
10-02-2007, 07:26 AM
The problem is all the cases who win are doing so on 'willfulness'.

Getting off is getting off, but getting off on a willfulness defense doesn't do anything as far as providing precedent that the income tax is illegal. All it means is that these people truly believed they didn't have to pay.

When somebody gets off on the basis of the law being unenforceable or unconstitutional I'll really cheer.

The feds are smart, if they ever get in a position where there is the slightest chance they could lose they use charges whose minimum defense is 'willfulness' ensuring that regardless of the outcome it will have no effect on their next case.


Yes but it is the first IRS defeat after Ron Paul started spreading his message. Don't you think that the jury was influenced by Ron Paul's message?

Marshall
10-02-2007, 07:51 AM
Yes but it is the first IRS defeat after Ron Paul started spreading his message. Don't you think that the jury was influenced by Ron Paul's message?

I sincerely doubt it. They've been sequestered for 4 months.

lucius
10-02-2007, 07:54 AM
Sweet!

dude58677
10-02-2007, 08:01 AM
I sincerely doubt it. They've been sequestered for 4 months.

Ron Paul's campaign has been going on for more then 4 months.

fsk
10-02-2007, 08:10 AM
If a jury acquits you, that doesn't mean that the bad guys can't prosecute other people, or prosecute you again if you continue to not pay taxes.

Also, if you're acquitted in a criminal trial, the IRS can still pursue a civil trial for the taxes they claim you owe.

However, as there are more and more acquittals, that means the bad guys are wasting time and money prosecuting with nothing to show for it. After all, the IRS and legal system can only prosecute a certain number of cases at a time. If this trial took 4 months, consider how much the bad guys wasted on court costs and lawyers' salaries.

Chester Copperpot
10-02-2007, 08:11 AM
Fuck Those Irs Pieces Of Shit

I Want My Gold Money And Replace Pieces Of Shit With Pieces Of Eight

Matt Collins
10-02-2007, 08:39 AM
Jury Nullification anyone? :D
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification

dude58677
10-02-2007, 08:55 AM
Jury Nullification anyone? :D
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification

Yea and the point I'm trying to make is that Ron Paul influenced the jury for jury nullification with his message. He is indirectly the defense attorney in this case.

richard1984
10-02-2007, 09:00 AM
Yea and the point I'm trying to make is that Ron Paul influenced the jury for jury nullification with his message. He is indirectly the defense attorney in this case.

You mean, like, they were influenced by the collective unconscious? :D

Hasn't there been at least one (maybe two or more) other tax evasion cases that have been won against the IRS since Dr. Paul started his campaign?

erowe1
10-02-2007, 09:42 AM
Yes but it is the first IRS defeat after Ron Paul started spreading his message. Don't you think that the jury was influenced by Ron Paul's message?

The chances are slim that anyone in the jury had ever heard of Ron Paul. As of this moment the great majority of Americans still haven't.

fsk
10-02-2007, 11:06 AM
The problem with jury nullification is that attorneys aren't allowed to remind juries of their jury nullification rights. Plus, there's no guarantee that someone with a clue will make it onto the jury.

Even if you're acquitted, you still don't get your time and legal fees back.

GoPaul08
03-17-2008, 12:37 AM
They still owe back taxes. They are not going ti jail...that is the ONLY thing they won.

They owe back taxes, with penalties and interest. They certainly did NOT win. The penalties will pretty much bankrupt them since they probably spent their money as if they were going to get to keep it.

These people's lives are basically ruined. They have no financial future. And you call this a victory?

Paul Revered
03-17-2008, 12:59 AM
I posted the link, in the OP, on MySpace.

Dr.3D
03-17-2008, 01:00 AM
They still owe back taxes. They are not going ti jail...that is the ONLY thing they won.

They owe back taxes, with penalties and interest. They certainly did NOT win. The penalties will pretty much bankrupt them since they probably spent their money as if they were going to get to keep it.

These people's lives are basically ruined. They have no financial future. And you call this a victory?

They don't owe squat!
No penalties or interest!
Their lives are not ruined.

They did win the case. The ruling was that the coins used were only worth the face value as defined by the U.S. Constitution. This means there were no taxes to be paid.

Mach
03-17-2008, 01:13 AM
He even has/had his own website...........

http://www.gcstation.net/liefreezone/

Dr.3D
03-17-2008, 01:22 AM
Now if everybody would just use the U.S. Minted silver and gold minted coins in their transactions, they would only have to report the face value of them. We need to have the stores put the prices of things in FRNs and Gold/Silver. Of course the gold/silver prices for the items would be much less than the FRN prices. State taxes would be much lower because if this and also the "income tax" would be much lower if not non existant.