Wesley Snipes tax protest case heads to court

[Osborn F Enready]

A few examples.....

There is no "law" to prosecute, prosecutors who break the law while pursuing prosecution.

Ever hear of the innocence project?

http://www.innocenceproject.org/]

The system is more than broken, its critically flawed and has been systematicly made worse by the bi-partisan monopoly that has existed for 157 years.

How about the Corrections Corporation?

Corrections Corp of America: Prison Privatization At Its Best

Here is a private BUSINESS built on taking over the states duties regarding corrections control, which being privatized does not really bother me.... but their business practices do. They hire lobbyists to push for more restrictive and harsher sentencing laws...... why? Its good for their business.

How about ALEC?

ALEC | History

Notice particularly the role of federalism here, in the history of the organization......


Sorry, both parties have been consistently and regularly usurping, weakening and infringing individual rights to the detriment of the concept of self-government by the conscent of the people......

You guys can kid and joke all you want, I know you're pro fascist or communist.... I have no problem with that, it will make things easier when the time comes to set things straight.




The problem is having two parties appoint justices, based on partisanship, in a nation that has over 70 political parties being SQUELCHED from any choice, any say, any way of affecting the elections due to their DECADES of gerrymandering and ballot access restriction creation and rigging, etc.

[tivodan1116]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready A few examples..... There is no "law" to prosecute, prosecutors who break the law while pursuing prosecution. Ever hear of the innocence project? http://www.innocenceproject.org/]

Huh? Ever hear of Mike Nifong?

Of course there are laws to prosecute corrupt prosecutors.

[GHook93]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready A few examples..... There is no "law" to prosecute, prosecutors who break the law while pursuing prosecution.

Not true prosecutors, like all lawyers are held the the state standards of ethic violations. If a prosecutor violates an ethic violation a judge, civilian or lawyer can bring ethic violation against him/her. He then goes in front of a committee and can be subject to sanctions. Aka Mike Nifong (Duke Law La Crosse). Some very unlawful prosecutors can be open to criminal charges. Lastly some unscrupulous prosecutors can be open to civil charges.

The standards are extremely high for civil and criminal prosecution, but ethic violations are not that great.

[Okieslims]

He was trying to use the tax loophole. Many have done it successfully. Many have failed. I hope he gets off considering our government is wasting our tax dollars on things that will never show a return. We are investing in our own demise. Until our government starts spending our money more wisely, paying taxes is merely a pointless routine.

[Okieslims]

Have you ever heard the phrase "professional courtesy'? I work with police officers and have personally witnessed officers receiving breaks based on "professional courtesy" on several occasions. Officers technically are still subject to punishment for violating the law, but are rarely punished.
I brought this up to point out that just because a prosecutor "can be" punished, does not mean he will be. There are inner circles in every field. If you work at 7-11, you might get to "weeze the juice", if you work at a hospital, docs will write you prescriptions, if you work as a maintenance guy at a university, you get first dibs on all the crap spoiled rich kids leave behind at years end, if you work as a part of law enforcement, you get to bend the law more than citizens do. These are all professional courtesies. They may not be right, but thats how this world works.

Quote by: GHook93 Not true prosecutors, like all lawyers are held the the state standards of ethic violations. If a prosecutor violates an ethic violation a judge, civilian or lawyer can bring ethic violation against him/her. He then goes in front of a committee and can be subject to sanctions. Aka Mike Nifong (Duke Law La Crosse). Some very unlawful prosecutors can be open to criminal charges. Lastly some unscrupulous prosecutors can be open to civil charges. The standards are extremely high for civil and criminal prosecution, but ethic violations are not that great.

[GHook93]

Quote by: Okieslims Have you ever heard the phrase "professional courtesy'? I work with police officers and have personally witnessed officers receiving breaks based on "professional courtesy" on several occasions. Officers technically are still subject to punishment for violating the law, but are rarely punished. I brought this up to point out that just because a prosecutor "can be" punished, does not mean he will be. There are inner circles in every field. If you work at 7-11, you might get to "weeze the juice", if you work at a hospital, docs will write you prescriptions, if you work as a maintenance guy at a university, you get first dibs on all the crap spoiled rich kids leave behind at years end, if you work as a part of law enforcement, you get to bend the law more than citizens do. These are all professional courtesies. They may not be right, but thats how this world works.

The existence of a law and enforcement of it are very different. Oz made the claim that there is no way to remedy to a rogue prosecutor. Prosecutors are open to the Federal Rules of Professional Ethics and can be subject to sanction, suspensions or disbarment. The enforcement of these standards is another issue.

[Okieslims]

Quote by: GHook93 The existence of a law and enforcement of it are very different. Oz made the claim that there is no way to remedy to a rogue prosecutor. Prosecutors are open to the Federal Rules of Professional Ethics and can be subject to sanction, suspensions or disbarment. The enforcement of these standards is another issue.

If I tore the "do not remove" tag from my mattress, I would be subject to punishment by the law. Good luck, however, bringing that fact to light.

What good is a law against somebody you can not enforce it upon?



And, why is it that they care so much about the tag on your mattress to threaten you? I've alway been curious about that.

[tivodan1116]

Quote by: Okieslims If I tore the "do not remove" tag from my mattress, I would be subject to punishment by the law. Good luck, however, bringing that fact to light.

Incidentally, no, you would not.

The tag says "not to be removed"..."except by consumer". Consumers can remove the tags, retailers cannot. The tag and accompanying law is to protect against unscrupulous mattress salespeople who would sell used mattresses (which are required to have yellow tags) as new by pulling off the tag.

And while we're debunking urban myths...

Quote by: Okieslims He was trying to use the tax loophole. Many have done it successfully.

No. None have done it successfully. Tax "protesters" who advance the boneheaded theories Snipes did ALWAYS lose. ALWAYS.

[Okieslims]

Quote by: tivodan1116 Incidentally, no, you would not. The tag says "not to be removed"..."except by consumer". Consumers can remove the tags, retailers cannot. The tag and accompanying law is to protect against unscrupulous mattress salespeople who would sell used mattresses (which are required to have yellow tags) as new by pulling off the tag. And while we're debunking urban myths... No. None have done it successfully. Tax "protesters" who advance the boneheaded theories Snipes did ALWAYS lose. ALWAYS.

The IRS has been trying and failing to convict Robert L. Schultz for failure to pay income tax since 2003. He has taught many his methods. Some succeed, some fail.

[tivodan1116]

Quote by: Okieslims The IRS has been trying and failing to convict Robert L. Schultz for failure to pay income tax since 2003. He has taught many his methods. Some succeed, some fail.

Except that he has been found liable in federal court for taxes many times... He currently has judgments against him for back taxes and penalties. Look it up on PACER (I can't link because it charges $.08 per page, but it's all there).

He has not been criminally convicted, but that is a different issue. In the criminal cases, the IRS tries to prove that the tax protester knew what they did was wrong, and the tax protester essentially pleads insanity - that they truly believe their line of crap and therefore do not know it was wrong.

However, in the CIVIL courts are where these bogus theories about not having to pay taxes are put to the test, and the tax protesters lose every time.

By the way, the website where he "teaches" his "methods" has been prevented from doing so by federal injunction, since his methods amount to selling advice on how to commit fraud.

[Okieslims]

He just provides information. What people do with it is their own business.. but anytime you try to face a giant, you're going to have issues.

[tivodan1116]

Quote by: Okieslims He just provides information. What people do with it is their own business.. but anytime you try to face a giant, you're going to have issues.

No, he doesn't "just provide information". He tells people how to commit tax fraud and encourages him to do so. That has been confirmed now by every level of court in the United States.

If I give you explicit plans on how to commit a bank robbery of a specific bank and then drive you there to do it, guess what? I'm guilty of conspiracy. It's no different with this jackass.

It has nothing to do with "facing a giant" either. I have "faced" the IRS on many occasions as part of a team and as a professional will do so many times on my own. If you have the truth and the law on your side, the U.S. courts will not hesitate to rule against the IRS. I could cite hundreds of cases where they have. If, however, you're a liar and a fraud like Schultz and his ilk, the courts will own you.

[Okieslims]

Quote by: tivodan1116 No, he doesn't "just provide information". He tells people how to commit tax fraud and encourages him to do so. That has been confirmed now by every level of court in the United States. If I give you explicit plans on how to commit a bank robbery of a specific bank and then drive you there to do it, guess what? I'm guilty of conspiracy. It's no different with this jackass. It has nothing to do with "facing a giant" either. I have "faced" the IRS on many occasions as part of a team and as a professional will do so many times on my own. If you have the truth and the law on your side, the U.S. courts will not hesitate to rule against the IRS. I could cite hundreds of cases where they have. If, however, you're a liar and a fraud like Schultz and his ilk, the courts will own you.

Then why isn't he in jail? If there is no substance to his reasoning, he should have been convicted and sentenced by now.. But, something is keeping him a free man.

[tivodan1116]

Quote by: Okieslims Then why isn't he in jail? If there is no substance to his reasoning, he should have been convicted and sentenced by now.. But, something is keeping him a free man.

Because you cannot be put in jail for a civil offense. Until you understand that basic principle of our system of laws, the debate will go nowhere.

Schultz and others are tried, usually, in two separate actions.

1) The civil action. This is where the government's job is to prove the TP owes the money. The TP's job is to prove they do not. This is where the bogus theories by Schultz and others get put to the test, and they lose every time. When the TP loses, the penalty is to pay the back taxes, along with fines and penalties for nonpayment - a MONETARY penalty.

2) The criminal action (in very serious cases). In this case, the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the TP willfully failed to pay taxes (or file returns, etc). This means that they must prove that the TP knew what they were doing was wrong and did it anyway. It's a high burden to meet, and many times TP are successful in convincing at least one juror that they truly believed they were not breaking the law by spouting their bogus theories. What happens is they get a juror who thinks the TP is just too stupid or insane to have done this on purpose. At any rate, if they are convicted in the criminal action, the penalty is PRISON.

What is keeping him a free man is that the IRS has not moved against him in a criminal action - probably because, like many of these frauds, he actually pays his taxes. They HAVE, however, moved against his "company", We The People, and gotten an injunction to prevent them from selling or giving away their nonsense "advice" on how to commit tax fraud. One of the requirements for getting this injunction was for the government to prove that the information being given out was FALSE. They did so by clear and convincing evidence, and so were granted an injunction. Be clear on what that means: Schultz had a full and fair chance to prove in court his theories were true, and the court found them utterly and completely false on the merits.

[Okieslims]

So why is Wesley Snipes facing potential jail time then? Schultz knowingly failed to pay taxes and failed to take taxes out of his employees checks. Wesley did the same.

Now, you seem to enjoy referring to Schultz as an idiot, and maybe you're right in doing so. But, he did his homework. He found a loophole in the law and it was working fine for him until he began to get national press for it.. then the irs cracked down on him.


Anyways, all I'm saying is that if Shchultz only punishment is civil then Snipes punishment should be the same.

[GHook93]

Quote by: Okieslims Have you ever heard the phrase "professional courtesy'? I work with police officers and have personally witnessed officers receiving breaks based on "professional courtesy" on several occasions. Officers technically are still subject to punishment for violating the law, but are rarely punished. I brought this up to point out that just because a prosecutor "can be" punished, does not mean he will be. There are inner circles in every field. If you work at 7-11, you might get to "weeze the juice", if you work at a hospital, docs will write you prescriptions, if you work as a maintenance guy at a university, you get first dibs on all the crap spoiled rich kids leave behind at years end, if you work as a part of law enforcement, you get to bend the law more than citizens do. These are all professional courtesies. They may not be right, but thats how this world works.

See what you fail to see, primarily because you are hopelessly on the left, is that much of what a prosecutor does is recorded in one way or another and much is publicly documented and available. The legal field has a higher degree of responsibility than pretty much every other profession. The Profession Rules of Conduct goes well above and beyond the law. Lawyers go through vigorous schooling to become a lawyer and losing ones license is a very scary thought to every lawyer. And if you think that defense lawyers will let a rogue prosecutor go unchecked, then you are again hopelessly on the left. Investigative reporters love "anonymous" tips on prosecutor corruption.

Go to the below site and then see if lawyers are sanctioned and punished. You might be pleasantly surprised!
Attorney Registration & Disciplinary Commission

[tivodan1116]

Quote by: Okieslims So why is Wesley Snipes facing potential jail time then? Schultz knowingly failed to pay taxes and failed to take taxes out of his employees checks. Wesley did the same.

You still do not understand the difference between civil and criminal charges. I'm not explaining it again. The court determined that Snipes' actions were "willful", the same has never been found for Schultz. I cannot dumb it down any further without losing the essence of what I am saying.

Further, most "tax protesters" are scam artists - selling false hopes to gullible anti-government types while simultaneously complying with the law themselves. For many years, Schultz was in compliance.

Schultz, for example, has collected over $2 million from gullible people since his corporations were founded. Know how we know that? From his TAX RETURNS that he duly filed for many years.

Now, you seem to enjoy referring to Schultz as an idiot, and maybe you're right in doing so. But, he did his homework. He found a loophole in the law and it was working fine for him until he began to get national press for it.. then the irs cracked down on him.

Nonsense. He did not "find a loophole". His plan - the so-called "blue folder" his company promotes, is out and out tax fraud. It was not "working" for him... it was simply that the government had not caught up to his followers yet. The wheels of justice grind slow.

It's just like speeding. If you drive 85mph in a 65mph zone, have you "found a loophole" in the speeding laws? Of course not - but that is the nonsense you are arguing. What you have done is gotten away with breaking the law, and eventually if you keep doing it, the odds are that you'll get caught.

I filed my taxes a month late in 1993. But because I was due a return (instead of payment) and because i was only a month late, it wasn't ever followed up on by the IRS. But did I break the law? Technically yes.

[Okieslims]

Actually, you can let your taxes ride for 3 years if you wish to. That's perfectly legal. So you didnt break the law unless it was one month after the three year max.


I understand the difference between civil and criminal actions. That said, what Wesley Snipes did was no worse than what Schultz did. They both avoided taxes with knowledge of what they were doing. You seem to not understand the nature of the crime that both of these guys committed is exactly the same, yet the punishment is different. Furthermore, your logic does not work with other crimes. Can I get out of a speeding ticket by claiming I did not know the speed limit? No. Citizens are responsible for knowing the laws of the land. The government is responsible for making information on those laws available to the public. Schultz found a technicality and that is the only reason he is a free man.. because the courts could not disprove his interpretation of the printed law beyond a reasonable doubt.

[Okieslims]

Quote by: GHook93 See what you fail to see, primarily because you are hopelessly on the left, is that much of what a prosecutor does is recorded in one way or another and much is publicly documented and available. The legal field has a higher degree of responsibility than pretty much every other profession. The Profession Rules of Conduct goes well above and beyond the law. Lawyers go through vigorous schooling to become a lawyer and losing ones license is a very scary thought to every lawyer. And if you think that defense lawyers will let a rogue prosecutor go unchecked, then you are again hopelessly on the left. Investigative reporters love "anonymous" tips on prosecutor corruption. Go to the below site and then see if lawyers are sanctioned and punished. You might be pleasantly surprised! Attorney Registration & Disciplinary Commission

What the hell are talking about man? "Hopeless on the left"? Were not discussing politics here, and ,as we've seen with the Bush whitehouse and his supporters, being on the right doesn't say much about your judgement. Furthermore, I guarantee you that professional curtosy is given to lawyers in their respective circles. You don't think police officers have the same "anonymous" tip lines? Police officers have internal investigation units thats only job is to nail cops! Yet I've seen drunk drivers merely mention that they know a cop and avoid trouble with the law. I've seen cops get away with all kinds of crap you wouldnt even believe... and no.. Im not anti-cop.. I work directly with cops.. Im simply telling it how it is.. If you wish to believe that Lady Justice is genuinely blind then good for you.. but the reality is that she is selective.. and the closer you work in relation to her, the better chance you have of avoiding her rath.. If the media gets the information, thats when the real trouble comes in. The media forces action.

[GHook93]

Quote by: Okieslims What the hell are talking about man? "Hopeless on the left"?

That is the direction you seem to lean towards, no?

Were not discussing politics here, and ,as we've seen with the Bush whitehouse and his supporters, being on the right doesn't say much about your judgement.

(1) Bush is about being a bad President. Many of times it doesn't matter which party you subscribe to you can be a good or bad leader. Bad or good Presidents can come out of either party. Most would agree, regardless of them being right or left, that Carter was one of the worst Presidents in history.

Furthermore, I guarantee you that professional curtosy is given to lawyers in their respective circles. You don't think police officers have the same "anonymous" tip lines? Police officers have internal investigation units thats only job is to nail cops!

What you are utterly wrong about in comparing lawyers to cops a lawyer has a high level of vested interest in reporting a lawyer for ethics violations and there is always a polar opposite in every trial. There is also not the same stigma when a lawyer "snitches" on another lawyer as a cop snitching on another cop. Compare apples to apples.