TP DC Police Detective

[Disilloosianed]

Oh, they all agree on the result, no matter how they get to it:

The rest of the population should have to shoulder the burden of supplying government services of which they gladly partake. They, however, should be immune from paying for these services, because.....well, because they don't want to. I mean honestly, even if there was a loophole that, if found, magically shielded the finder from paying tax, why should the rest of us have to pay your share? I think that's what burns me up the most about tax protestors, that ultimately, it's not about patriotism or legalism or self-determination. It's a game of "gotcha" that they hope will keep them from having to participate in the responsibilities of citizenship.

[Quixote]

I've heard about 8-10 diferent spins on why you don't have to pay income taxes based on CTC and each one swears they're doing it right and everyone else is screwing it up.

In the first paragraph of CtC, Pete Hendrickson admits that he started with the conclusion that he isn't subject to the income tax and that only after several false starts at a rationalization hit upon the melange of sophisms that make up CtC.

[John J. Bulten]

Actually, it's buried in the first paragraph of the introduction, p. vii, between the foreword and the text proper. Your other mistake, aside from your slanted characterizations, is that if you wrest from him the conclusion you attribute, he only posits it tenuously so he can demolish it. Of course Pete and CtC readers would admit we are subject to income tax/tax on all our income (less deductions).

Until some point within the last year [2002], my faith in the integrity, indeed the lawfulness, of the U.S. Supreme Court was in a sad state of disrepair, and had been for many years. In light of the obvious unconstitutionality of the "income" tax-- as enforced against private citizens within the 50 states-- the failure of the court to declare it so seemed an incontrovertible indictment. At the very least, respect for the rule of law demanded that the apparently incomprehensible statute be ruled void for vagueness, but for all the many years that this tax has been with us, it has been permitted to remain, largely unscathed.

Last year, my faith was restored. Well, that's actually far too strong a statement-- the court still has much to answer for, regarding the "income" tax and a good deal else. But as far as the Constitutionality of that tax as written is concerned, all is well, for the IRC passes Constitutional muster.

*****

[jg]

Of course Pete and CtC readers would admit we are subject to income tax/tax on all our income (less deductions).

What the Supremes use to determine what is included in "gross income" is (again): In the absence of a specific exemption, payments are income within the meaning of section 61 when, like the payments involved in Glenshaw Glass Co., the payments are undeniably accessions to wealth, clearly realized, and over which the respondent has complete dominion.

Please provide the basis for claiming your work for pay is not included in "gross income" or the specific exemption that applies to those payments.

Why is your work for pay (since it increases your wealth, when realized and is under your dominion) not included in "gross income" of section 61?

[Nikki]

Actually, it's buried in the first paragraph of the introduction, p. vii, between the foreword and the text proper. Your other mistake, aside from your slanted characterizations, is that if you wrest from him the conclusion you attribute, he only posits it tenuously so he can demolish it. Of course Pete and CtC readers would admit we are subject to income tax/tax on all our income (less deductions).

You just have severe delusions as to what constitutes taxable income. For some inexplicable (except that you are tax evaders?) reason, you have convinced yourselves that your opinion as to what is included in income differs significantly from that which is stated in the law and which has been confirmed by every court that has ever addressed the issue.

[Demosthenes]

The DC detective's indictment finally hit PACER:

http://www.cheatingfrenzy.com/irving1.pdf

[John J. Bulten]

Please cut to the chase: Why is your work for pay (since it increases your wealth, when realized and is under your dominion) not included in "gross income" of section 61?

I will respond on the thread "Once More Into the Breach", God willing.

Please provide the basis for claiming your work for pay is not included in "gross income" or the specific exemption that applies to those payments.

Why is your work for pay (since it increases your wealth, when realized and is under your dominion) not included in "gross income" of section 61?

Why, JG, you're redundant.

[jg]

Why, JG, you're redundant.

Only want to be sure you do not miss this question that is basic to your (and CtC) claims.
Got an answer?

[Quixote]

I will try to drag this thread back on topic. These add to the huh? factor for me. I'm assuming there are not two men named Michael C. Irving working as cops in DC.

US Attorney's Annual Law Enforcement Awards Ceremony - 2001
United States v. Donald Bush and William Moody

Detective Dwayne Corbett
Detective Mitchell A. Credle
Detective Michael C. Irving, Fifth District
Detective Brett Smith, Third District

Nominated by AUSA Debroah Sines

This prosecution requires a "team award" involving four individuals because of the remarkable efforts of each detective. Their outstanding work in both the investigation and prosecution of a murder for hire case in a crime-ridden apartment complex at Brentwood Road and Rhode Island Avenue, NE, in the District of Columbia forced two guilty pleas in a brutal murder for hire case. On March 4, 1999, Marvin Bush was shot to death, while in the lobby of an apartment building at 1293 Brentwood Road, NE. Dwayne Stewart was also wounded during this incident. Both victims were rivals of defendant Bush. Moody offered to kill both men for Bush for $3,500.00. Immediately after the shootings, Bush paid Moody $2,000.00 and promised to pay the remainder due the following day. However, excellent police work by Detective Brett Smith resulted in the arrest of Moody just a few hours after the shooting - which precluded Bush from paying the rest of the money. A search at the scene of the arrest resulted in the recover of a loaded weapon hidden inside of a VCR and the murder weapon which had been secreted in a kitchen. Detective Smith receives this award for identifying an eyewitness on the scene, persuading the reluctant witness to cooperate, and tracking the defendant by monitoring his phone calls to his friends.

Detectives Dwayne Corbett and Michael C. Irving receive this award based upon their exemplary interrogation skills. They exacted a video-taped confession from Moody, who admitted shooting both victims, but did not confess to the murder for hire scheme. These detectives also convinced Moody's girlfriend to admit that the defendant had confessed these shootings to her as well.

Armed with the initial confession, Detectives Mitchell Credle and Michael C. Irving approached Bush in an effort to gain admissions from him as well. Initial efforts failed. This was fatal to building a case against Bush because the government had insufficient evidence with which to charge him. Without Bush, Moody had no incentive to plead guilty. Dogged efforts by Detectives Credle and Irving altered this stagnation. They ultimately obtained a confession from Bush which included the murder for hire scheme.

On March 17, 2000, Bush entered a pre-indictment plea to conspiracy to commit murder. Thereafter, Moody pleaded guilty to Second-Degree Murder While Armed on April 4, 2000. On May 24, 2000, Bush received the maximum sentence for Conspiracy to Commit Murder, two and one-half to five years On May 25, 2000, Moody was sentenced to 14 years to 42 years of incarceration.

CHAMPS Award - September 1999 Recipients
The CHAMPS Award Luncheon was held in the Willard Inter-Continental Hotel located at 1401 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, on September 1, 1999.

First District
Second District
Fourth District
Fifth District
Sixth District
Seventh District
Special Operations Division
Intelligence Section

...

Fifth District

Detective Jeffrey C. Owens
Detective Michael C. Irving
Officer Anthony Bingham

During the month of July 1999, Detective Jeffrey C. Owens, Detective Michael C. Irving, with the assistance from Officer Anthony Bingham, closed two homicide cases.

On Saturday, June 12, 1999, a male subject was found unconscious in the street suffering from numerous gunshot wounds. The subject was pronounced dead by the Medical Examiner. Detective Jeffrey C. Owens and Detective Michael C. Irving were assigned to investigate the case. Officer Bingham, the PSA officer for the area in which the homicide occurred, was contacted by an informant who gave him intelligence information regarding the homicide. Officer Bingham advised the detectives of what he had, and they responded to the informant's location and transported him to the US Attorney's office to give a statement. In the statement, the informant identified the driver of the auto along with the shooter. Detectives Owens and Irving applied for and received an arrest warrant for both suspects.

On Thursday, July 1, 1999, Detectives Owens and Irving and Officer Bingham responded to the last known addresses of the two suspects and apprehended them without incident.

On Saturday, June 26, 1999, a female was found unconscious and covered with blood in a motel in the northeast section of the District of Columbia. Several days later, the female died and Detectives Owens and Irving were assigned to investigate the case. During the course of their investigation, they located two witnesses who reported that they had a telephone conversation with a male subject who related that he killed a female by striking her on the head. Detectives Owens and Irving showed the witnesses an array of photos wherein both witnesses identified the same man to whom they talked. The detectives applied for and received an arrest warrant for the suspect. The only address they had for the suspect was at a family member's home. The detectives responded to that address and because of their investigative techniques and expertise, the family supplied them with the information they needed--the wanted suspect had absconded to Los Angeles, California.

On Sunday, July 4, 1999, Detectives Irving and Owens contacted the LA Police Department, advised them of the case, and that the wanted suspect was living in their area. The LA Police responded to the suspect's location and arrested him without incident.

US Attorney's Annual Law Enforcement Awards Ceremony - 2000


United States v. Alonzo Robinson
United States v. George Withers

Detective Todd C. Amis
Detective Michael C. Irving
Detective Edward Truesdale, Jr.
Detective William G. White, Fifth District

Nominated by AUSA Deborah Sines

Detectives Todd C. Amis, Michael C. Irving, Edward Truesdale, Jr. and William G. White of the Metropolitan Police Department's Fifth District receive this award for their outstanding work in a series of brutal shootings of three people and a stabbing, which began in 3D, but ended in 5D after the defendant moved to 5D. These men formed a unit designed solely to apprehend and prosecute Alonzo Robinson and an associate, George Withers, when they noticed a pattern in a series of violent crimes, all involving extensive facial disfigurement of the victims. The crimes included a 1995 robbery of Jerome Mitchell, a pizza delivery man, who was stabbed in the eye and lost his eye; a 1997 murder of Haseem Bailey, who was shot in the face and back; a 1998 shooting of Edgar Chocon, who was shot in the face with a sawed-off shot-gun, and a 1998 shooting of Sharonitta Myles.

The team worked backwards, beginning with the August 1, 1998 shooting of Ms. Myles, who was shot in the breast and abdomen with a sawed-off shotgun. Initially, Ms. Myles claimed that she did not know her attacker. The team was certain that Ms. Myles could make an identification. They learned that she was a long term victim of domestic violence who bore scars stemming from years of abuse from several men. The team began to work extensively with Ms. Myles until she admitted that she knew her assailant by the name of "0." Incredibly, without a real name or address, the team was able to identify the defendant as Alonzo Robinson in just four days. Once so identified, his capture was immediate.

The team obtained videotaped confessions from Robinson on each crime and learned the identity of George Withers as one of the assailant's in the 1995 stabbing incident. As a result, Withers was also arrested, and also gave a videotaped confession. The videotapes have been used as training tools for new detectives. Both defendants were forced to plead guilty after the team developed overwhelming evidence on each crime. On January 26, 1999, Withers was sentenced to eight years of incarceration under the Youth Act for his role in the 1995 stabbing of Jerome Mitchell. On June 29, 1999, Robinson was sentenced to 10 to 30 years for the 1997 murder, three and one-third years to 10 years for the 1998 shooting of Edgar Chocon, and 10 to 30 years for the 1998 shooting of Sharonitta Myles.

[John J. Bulten]

I will try to drag this thread back on topic.

Is that because you don't want to answer my question? It's simple enough: "How can the collections process collect [on a zero assessment] without a reassessment to that effect?" Or, "How can a refund be taken back outside federal court, unless taken in the form of collections for unrelated years, which is due to not following CtC for those years?"

And Demo, I'm disappointed that Cheating Frenzy has no index. Is it only for quoting, not for browsing?

And JG, I'm disappointed you haven't replied to the answer you demanded so often. I guess I'll start a new thread. There's little interest in this one, except for the oddity that Quatloos is actually outing a government worker for fraud. I could nominate some more for you ....

[Demosthenes]

Look at the title of the thread, John.

And I doubt too many posters here are devastated when a tax protester is disappointed.

[John J. Bulten]

the oddity that Quatloos is actually outing a government worker for fraud

Topicality compliance confirmed.

[Nikki]

the oddity that Quatloos is actually outing a government worker for fraud

Topicality compliance confirmed.

Clearly, you have absolutely no comprehension of (among many other things) the difference between repeating a published news story and "outing" someone.

If you would like an excellent example of "outing," you should refer to the various images posted on your guru's web site.

[Quixote]

There's little interest in this one ...

I disagree. I find it fascinating that Irving could be so dedicted to law enforcement while simultaneously breaking the law. He managed to convince himself that he didn't need to pay DC income taxes, the very taxes from which his salary was paid. I wonder what the DoJ lawyers he worked with so closely think about his tax evasion.

[Demosthenes]

A detective turns in his badge — murderers celebrate
Harry Jaffe, The Examiner
2007-05-08 07:00:00.0
Current rank: # 171 of 15,273

WASHINGTON -
The knock on Mike Irvin’s door came very early one morning a few months ago. His wife and toddler were still asleep. Two officials from the Internal Revenue Service informed him he was under investigation.

“I spend my time putting people in the joint,” Irvin tells me. “Who would have thought I would be in this spot?”

We’re in the back booth at a diner on Connecticut Avenue. Moms are treating their kids to burgers and fries. Mike Irvin, one of the District’s best homicide detectives, is telling me how he got jammed up by the IRS.

The whole time I’m wondering: Is justice served when a good cop is forced to turn in his badge, and a hundred cases he’s worked on are put in jeopardy? Are we safer because the feds make an example out of Irvin, while murderers roam the streets? More on that later.

Irvin, 42, came to D.C. when he was a toddler. He graduated from Mackin Catholic High and took classes at Howard University before he joined the Metropolitan Police Department in September 1989. The District was the murder capital of the world that year, with nearly 500 slayings. Close to half of those were in 7D, the police district that covers Anacostia, where Mike Irvin got his start.

“You could get a violent crime call every 10 minutes,” he says.

Irvin got to know everyone: the bad guys, the grandmothers, the shopkeepers, the kids on the corners. “I knew where all the crooks were,” he says. He made detective in 1996, and he’s been putting murderers behind bars ever since. He worked with Robert Mueller, when the FBI director was a prosecutor in D.C.’s U.S. Attorney’s Office.

Assistant Attorney General Ken Wainstein worked with him, too.

Remember the three restaurant workers killed execution-style at Colonel Brooks’ Tavern in 2003? Irvin got two of the three suspects to confess.

Remember Joyce Chiang, the lawyer who went missing in 1999, until her body washed up along the Potomac River? Her death was ruled a suicide. Irvin doubted that and was about to get a box of evidence, when he was indicted for tax evasion in late April.

The cold facts are that Irvin didn’t pay taxes starting in 2002. At the advice of another cop, he filed forms that essentially made him a tax protester. The IRS investigated and didn’t buy the scheme. Irvin ignored their letters; now he’s facing arraignment tomorrow and a nasty trial, perhaps.

“I made a huge mistake,” Irvin tells me. “I couldn’t feel much worse, and I am paying it all back.” He’s started paying off the $130,000 IRS prosecutors estimate he owes.

Why not settle this in civil court? The feds are going to have a hard time proving Irvin intended to defraud the government, especially when law enforcement luminaries like Wainstein and Mueller vouch for him.

In this legal battle, everyone loses but the murderers, who might be free of the one man who could put them behind bars.

[Demosthenes]

Decorated Police Officer Faces Tax Charges

POSTED: 10:27 am EDT May 9, 2007

WASHINGTON -- A decorated detective with the Metropolitan Police Department is scheduled to appear in court Wednesday on tax evasion and fraud charges.

According to prosecutors, 42-year-old Michael Irving filed false tax claims between 2000 and 2002.

Irving is accused of filing at least $65,000 in false refund claims.

His attorney said his client simply made unintentional mistakes.

The detective was honored in the past for his work in solving the 2003 triple-homicidecase at Colonel Brooks Tavern in northeast D.C.

Umm. He put a "0" on every line of his returns and then stopped filing entirely...

[Doktor Avalanche]

Decorated Police Officer Faces Tax Charges

POSTED: 10:27 am EDT May 9, 2007

WASHINGTON -- A decorated detective with the Metropolitan Police Department is scheduled to appear in court Wednesday on tax evasion and fraud charges.

According to prosecutors, 42-year-old Michael Irving filed false tax claims between 2000 and 2002.

Irving is accused of filing at least $65,000 in false refund claims.

His attorney said his client simply made unintentional mistakes.

The detective was honored in the past for his work in solving the 2003 triple-homicidecase at Colonel Brooks Tavern in northeast D.C.

Umm. He put a "0" on every line of his returns and then stopped filing entirely...

That will do it.