This is just sad

iplawyer

This is just sad

Post by iplawyer »

Here is a message at LH from mtmmom3boys - a woman who appears to be the mother to 3 boys:
My husband is serving a 12 year term in Colorado for failure to pay (state). He has been a regular reader of this forum, Cracking the Code, etc and I frequently send him a print of the forum index so he can highllight threads for me to send him.

His question is "What section of the IRC requires the Criminal Investigation Division to notify you when a criminal investigation is instigated?" He never received this prior to his incarceration.

Please don't quote the IRC to me; I suspect he is pulling together legal document and needs the site reference.
Quixote
Quatloosian Master of Deception
Posts: 1542
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2003 2:00 am
Location: Sanhoudalistan

Re: This is just sad

Post by Quixote »

I'm not sure which is sadder, that the guy is depending on the LostHeads for legal advice, or that he got all the way through a trial for evading Colorado income taxes without figuring out that his case had been handled by state investigators.
"Here is a fundamental question to ask yourself- what is the goal of the income tax scam? I think it is a means to extract wealth from the masses and give it to a parasite class." Skankbeat
Noah
Exalted Parter of the Great Sea of Insanity
Posts: 195
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 7:48 pm

Re: This is just sad

Post by Noah »

Why is CTC and other books still for sale on LH website?
LPC
Trusted Keeper of the All True FAQ
Posts: 5233
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:38 am
Location: Earth

Re: This is just sad

Post by LPC »

My husband is serving a 12 year term in Colorado for failure to pay (state). He has been a regular reader of this forum, Cracking the Code, etc and I frequently send him a print of the forum index so he can highllight threads for me to send him.
Great.

Your husband is in prison for manufacturing meth and you're looking for ways to send him more sudafed.
His question is "What section of the IRC requires the Criminal Investigation Division to notify you when a criminal investigation is instigated?" He never received this prior to his incarceration.
Really? You really think that there's a section of the Internal Revenue Code that requires notice to tax evaders before they're investigated, so that they can cover their tracks?

You really think that there's some procedural rule that absolves your husband of any criminal liability and allows him to walk free regardless of whether or not he was prejudiced in any way?

You really think that the Internal Revenue Code applies to (state) criminal prosecutions?
Please don't quote the IRC to me; I suspect he is pulling together legal document and needs the site reference.
Your incoherence is refreshing and reassuring.

Since you've asked about the IRC, we won't quote the IRC for you, but just provide a "site" reference.

Try http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/ ... 01_26.html
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
Famspear
Knight Templar of the Sacred Tax
Posts: 7668
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 12:59 pm
Location: Texas

Re: This is just sad

Post by Famspear »

Noah wrote:Why is CTC and other books still for sale on LH website?
That's a good question. I can't remember whether it's been discussed here before in relation to Hendrickson's CtC scam.

One possible approach would be for the feds to try to shut down the losthorizons web site (by obtaining an injunction from a federal district court) as a web site that is an avenue for an activity that is "specified conduct" under sections 7408 and 6701 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Under the law, any person who aids or assists in, procures, or advises with respect to the preparation or presentation of any portion of a return, affidavit, claim, or other document who knows (or has reason to believe) that such portion will be used in connection with any material matter arising under the internal revenue laws, and who knows that such portion (if so used) would result in an understatement of the liability for tax of another person may be engaging in "specified conduct" -- section 6701(a) conduct, to be precise -- for purposes of sections 7408(a) and 7408(c).

Does the losthorizons web site do this?
"My greatest fear is that the audience will beat me to the punch line." -- David Mamet
Famspear
Knight Templar of the Sacred Tax
Posts: 7668
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 12:59 pm
Location: Texas

Re: This is just sad

Post by Famspear »

mtmmom3boys wrote:My husband is serving a 12 year term in Colorado for failure to pay (state). He has been a regular reader of this forum, Cracking the Code, etc and I frequently send him a print of the forum index so he can highllight threads for me to send him.

His question is "What section of the IRC requires the Criminal Investigation Division to notify you when a criminal investigation is instigated?" He never received this prior to his incarceration.

Please don't quote the IRC to me; I suspect he is pulling together legal document and needs the site reference.
Maybe her husband's confusion (or her confusion?) relates to something the husband might have heard about IRC section 7602(c) -- which relates only to federal tax matters of course, and only to matters in connection with an IRS summons. Section 7602(c) generally requires that the taxpayer be given "reasonable notice in advance" of third party contacts "with respect to the determination or collection of the tax liability". Of course, that requirement does not apply to a pending criminal investigation (see section 7602(c)(3)).
"My greatest fear is that the audience will beat me to the punch line." -- David Mamet
LPC
Trusted Keeper of the All True FAQ
Posts: 5233
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:38 am
Location: Earth

Re: This is just sad

Post by LPC »

Famspear wrote:Maybe her husband's confusion (or her confusion?) relates to something the husband might have heard about IRC section 7602(c) -- which relates only to federal tax matters of course, and only to matters in connection with an IRS summons. Section 7602(c) generally requires that the taxpayer be given "reasonable notice in advance" of third party contacts "with respect to the determination or collection of the tax liability". Of course, that requirement does not apply to a pending criminal investigation (see section 7602(c)(3)).
There you go, being logical again.

Yes, it's possible that her confusion/stupidity relates to something that is actually in the IRC. But it's also possible (and more likely) that her confusion/stupidity relates to something that is completely imaginary/hallucinatory/moronic, and doesn't exist at all.
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
Lorax

Re: This is just sad

Post by Lorax »

I think the BS at losthorizons is protected speech under the First Amendment, and thus the feds can't take down the website. They might have a case against Pete because of the tax returns of his followers, but as far as I know, this wouldn't give them the authority to shut down the website.
Imalawman
Enchanted Consultant of the Red Stapler
Posts: 1808
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 8:23 pm
Location: Formerly in a cubicle by the window where I could see the squirrels, and they were married.

Re: This is just sad

Post by Imalawman »

iplawyer wrote:Here is a message at LH from mtmmom3boys - a woman who appears to be the mother to 3 boys:
My husband is serving a 12 year term in Colorado for failure to pay (state). He has been a regular reader of this forum, Cracking the Code, etc and I frequently send him a print of the forum index so he can highllight threads for me to send him.

His question is "What section of the IRC requires the Criminal Investigation Division to notify you when a criminal investigation is instigated?" He never received this prior to his incarceration.

Please don't quote the IRC to me; I suspect he is pulling together legal document and needs the site reference.
12 years?!?! for a state tax crime?!?! Wow. That's impressive. I suspect there's more to the story than what is being presented here. You have to have multiple years with significant earnings, layers of fraud/or prior conviction, and an aggressive prosecutor to get that much time on the state level.
"Some people are like Slinkies ... not really good for anything, but you can't help smiling when you see one tumble down the stairs" - Unknown
Famspear
Knight Templar of the Sacred Tax
Posts: 7668
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 12:59 pm
Location: Texas

Re: This is just sad

Post by Famspear »

Lorax wrote:I think the BS at losthorizons is protected speech under the First Amendment, and thus the feds can't take down the website. They might have a case against Pete because of the tax returns of his followers, but as far as I know, this wouldn't give them the authority to shut down the website.
My view on that is that if the losthorizons web site violates section 6701, it's not protected speech under the First Amendment. (In other words, I think section 6701 is constitutional.) I'm just not sure that the operation of the web site really does violate section 6701.

I think you might be able to make a case for a violation, though. If you read 6701 broadly, then Pete is arguably "aiding or assisting in" the preparation or presentation of at least a "portion" of a federal income tax return for each of his followers who use his scam. That may be a bit of a stretch in interpreting the statute, though.

My opinion is that if the web site does not violate section 6701 (or some other law), then the feds can't legally take it down - but not because of the First Amendment alone. If the web site does not violate some law somewhere, then there is simply no legal authority for the feds to close it down -- with or without the First Amendment.
"My greatest fear is that the audience will beat me to the punch line." -- David Mamet
User avatar
Gregg
Conde de Quatloo
Posts: 5631
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 5:08 am
Location: Der Dachshundbünker

Re: This is just sad

Post by Gregg »

Noah wrote:Why is CTC and other books still for sale on LH website?
At one time is was a damn convenient place for the IRS to go to find tax evaders.
Supreme Commander of The Imperial Illuminati Air Force
Your concern is duly noted, filed, folded, stamped, sealed with wax and affixed with a thumbprint in red ink, forgotten, recalled, considered, reconsidered, appealed, denied and quietly ignored.
.
Pirate Purveyor of the Last Word
Posts: 1698
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 2:06 am

Re: This is just sad

Post by . »

I'm a little surprised that they haven't gone after CtC on the same basis as Schiff, enjoining the sale of unprotected commercial speech like The Federal Mafia under §6700 and 6701 (and other sections) or at least requiring the posting of any injunction on the related site.

CtC would seem to fit right in. Plus, it might give Doreen something useful to do.
All the States incorporated daughter corporations for transaction of business in the 1960s or so. - Some voice in Van Pelt's head, circa 2006.
User avatar
Gregg
Conde de Quatloo
Posts: 5631
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 5:08 am
Location: Der Dachshundbünker

Re: This is just sad

Post by Gregg »

. wrote:I'm a little surprised that they haven't gone after CtC on the same basis as Schiff, enjoining the sale of unprotected commercial speech like The Federal Mafia under §6700 and 6701 (and other sections) or at least requiring the posting of any injunction on the related site.

CtC would seem to fit right in. Plus, it might give Doreen something useful to do.
She needs to be finding a place to live in when they IRS tosses her on the street for the taxes, fines penalties etc... her and Pete ran up.
Supreme Commander of The Imperial Illuminati Air Force
Your concern is duly noted, filed, folded, stamped, sealed with wax and affixed with a thumbprint in red ink, forgotten, recalled, considered, reconsidered, appealed, denied and quietly ignored.
.
Pirate Purveyor of the Last Word
Posts: 1698
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 2:06 am

Re: This is just sad

Post by . »

Then again, considering the total collapse of the CrackHead "warriors" perhaps IRS and DoJ consider CtC to be so discredited and widely ignored that they're just another low-value target that's not worth going after.

That would be very sad for Harvey.

But, hey, look at the bright side, Harv. That gives them more time and money to go after you, considering that you're the biggest proponent of CtC BS currently extant on the interwebs.
All the States incorporated daughter corporations for transaction of business in the 1960s or so. - Some voice in Van Pelt's head, circa 2006.
LPC
Trusted Keeper of the All True FAQ
Posts: 5233
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:38 am
Location: Earth

Re: This is just sad

Post by LPC »

. wrote:I'm a little surprised that they haven't gone after CtC on the same basis as Schiff, enjoining the sale of unprotected commercial speech like The Federal Mafia under §6700 and 6701 (and other sections) or at least requiring the posting of any injunction on the related site.
Schiff's book could be enjoined because it had a chapter with very specific instructions on how to file an income tax return reporting zero income. Even the government admitted that, if Schiff had ripped that chapter out of the book, the government would not have been able to enjoin it. The 9th Circuit characterized the book as "acting as an advertisement for Schiff's full range of tax-avoidance products and services." US v. Schiff, 379 F. 3d 621, 629 (9th Cir. 2004).

From what I've read on LH, it's pretty clear that CtC does NOT have a chapter on how to fill out and file Form 4852 (or an amended Form 1099-MISC), so the book would not be part of a plan or arrangement to avoid tax, and could not be enjoined. And Hendrickson never sold any other "tax-avoidance products or services" for which CtC could be considered an advertisement. So CtC is very different from Schiff's book.

I gritted my teeth and listened to all of Larken Rose's "Theft by Deception" and reached the same conclusion. Yes, it was crap and it was wrong, but there was no plan or scheme or arrangement to avoid any tax. He never told anyone whether (or how) to file a tax return.

For both TbD and CtC, I think that injunctions would have been outside of the statute, and would have violated the 1st Amendment.
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
LPC
Trusted Keeper of the All True FAQ
Posts: 5233
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:38 am
Location: Earth

Re: This is just sad

Post by LPC »

Famspear wrote:My view on that is that if the losthorizons web site violates section 6701, it's not protected speech under the First Amendment.
I don't think that courts can enjoin web sites.

The IRC imposes penalties on *persons* who promote abusive tax shelters or aid in the avoidance of tax, and empowers the courts to enjoin *persons* who violate those provisions.

So what person should be enjoined? Doreen? What is Doreen doing (or writing) that warrants an injunction?

At present, the LH website is nothing but a bunch of losers spouting gibberish. They're not promoting anything, and there's nothing (and no one) to enjoin.
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
.
Pirate Purveyor of the Last Word
Posts: 1698
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 2:06 am

Re: This is just sad

Post by . »

LPC wrote:Schiff's book could be enjoined because it had a chapter with very specific instructions on how to file an income tax return reporting zero income. Even the government admitted that, if Schiff had ripped that chapter out of the book, the government would not have been able to enjoin it.
Got it. Thanks. My little bit of surprise has diminished to zero.
All the States incorporated daughter corporations for transaction of business in the 1960s or so. - Some voice in Van Pelt's head, circa 2006.
ashlynne39
Illuminated Legate of Illustrious Legs
Posts: 660
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 5:27 am

Re: This is just sad

Post by ashlynne39 »

. wrote:Then again, considering the total collapse of the CrackHead "warriors" perhaps IRS and DoJ consider CtC to be so discredited and widely ignored that they're just another low-value target that's not worth going after.

.
I sure hope not. There are a couple of Hendrickson's followers on another board I frequent that really irritate me and I hope the IRS and DOJ go after them. They are two incredibly dishonest people.
Famspear
Knight Templar of the Sacred Tax
Posts: 7668
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 12:59 pm
Location: Texas

Re: This is just sad

Post by Famspear »

ashlynne39 wrote:
. wrote:Then again, considering the total collapse of the CrackHead "warriors" perhaps IRS and DoJ consider CtC to be so discredited and widely ignored that they're just another low-value target that's not worth going after.

.
I sure hope not. There are a couple of Hendrickson's followers on another board I frequent that really irritate me and I hope the IRS and DOJ go after them. They are two incredibly dishonest people.
Ooooooh. Another place on the internet where I can find and interact with Crackheads? Ashlynne39, can you post a link here? -- or email it to me at:

lawfulman(at)gmail.com [edited by moderator - avoid posting email addresses such that spam emails can find their way into you inbox]

???

I have got to get a life.......

EDIT: Oh, I forgot what I was intending to post..... from losthorizons.... user "justinprime"...... (emphasis added)......
I was thinking that those who receive their full refunds ....[ snip] ...The idea is that positive reinforcement goes a looong way when it comes to getting desirable behaviors to be repeated. (I'm a mental health therapist.)..[snip]...
http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewt ... 5694#25694

Justinprime is a "mental health therapist"????

Readers, please insert your own jokes here.
"My greatest fear is that the audience will beat me to the punch line." -- David Mamet
User avatar
webhick
Illuminati Obfuscation: Black Ops Div
Posts: 3994
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:41 am

Re: This is just sad

Post by webhick »

Famspear wrote:Justinprime is a "mental health therapist"????

Readers, please insert your own jokes here.
I don't know how many times I have to tell that guy: Merely participating in your court-ordered group therapy sessions does not qualify you as a mental health therapist. And stop mainlining cocoa mix. It makes you weird and jittery and I'm pretty certain that your bladder will eventually start manufacturing tiny little marshmallows. Maybe one day when you look down at the bowl before you flush and see them floating around (or all over the floor around the bowl, if you've got bad aim...in which case the flushing serves no purpose except to cover your ass so you can blame the mess on the dog), you'll finally see the error of your ways. Probably not, though. Probably you'll just tattoo "Refused for Cause" in red ink on your winkie, which would be awesome on a couple of different levels. Keep in mind I'm leaving out an obligatory joke about a micron telescope and the smallest needle in the world, because I'm a nice person and you should appreciate that.
When chosen for jury duty, tell the judge "fortune cookie says guilty" - A fortune cookie